Society for Music Theory

The Construction and Interpretation of Bespoke Pitch-Class Set Genera as Models of Harmonic
Duality in William Schuman's Sixth Symphony
Author(s): Richard C. Pye
Source: Music Theory Spectrum, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Autumn, 2003), pp. 243-274
Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Society for Music Theory
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3595432
Accessed: 10/08/2010 15:05

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucal.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of California Press and Society for Music Theory are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Music Theory Spectrum.

http://www.jstor.org
 of BespokePitch-ClassSet
andInterpretation
TheConstruction
Generaas ModelsofHarmonicDuality in WilliamSchumans
Sixth Symphony
RICHARD C. PYE

In William Schuman'sSixth Symphony(1948),a specificharmonicdualitymaybe seen to operate

on two levels:a ratherloosely defined contrastof chromaticand diatonicelements,reflecting
VincentPersichetti'sassessmentof "theheroicdualismcausedby the resistanceof the diatonicto
the chromaticin the Sixth Symphony"and a focusingof that oppositionin the formof two 'triad
plus added-note'sonorities.A formal model based upon pitch-class set-class genus theory is
constructedas a meansof makingfurther,andmoreinformed,observationsaboutthis music.

O N THE FACE OF IT, the underlying premise of a sys-
tem of genera based upon networks of inclusion
relationships between pitch-class set-classes is an
attractiveone. To providea theoreticalmodel of pitch struc-
ture for a given work, or at least sections of it, would seem to
be a profitablecourseof action for music analysis,if only as a
first step. And yet since the emergenceof theories of genera
devised by RichardParksand Allen Forte over a decade ago,
there has been relativelylittle evidence of work in this field.1
I See Parks 1989 and 1998a and Forte 1988. Forte has published two fur-
ther articles to date that invoke his system of generic relations. The first
presents an examination of octatonic formations in the music of
Debussy (Forte 1991). Forte's second paper (1992), on the music of Ives,
is disappointing in that the presentation of the genera matrices contains
a number of errors and inconsistencies. In spite of Forte's claim that "a
major purpose of the system of genera is to permit close examination of
large-scale harmonic vocabularies" (1991: 161, n. 19), the only major
study to examine a significant body of work from a generic perspective
extant at the time of writing is Kennett's fine thesis (1995) on the
music of Frank Bridge. Kennett provides a detailed study of Forte's sys-
tem of genera and, crucially,the implications of the theory in practice.
One reason for this hiatus in genus studies has been sug-
gested by CraigAyrey,who notes that,
the new formalism-which brought postgraduate courses in analysis
and theory on this side of the Atlantic to maturity in the 1980s ... has
been challenged by the divergent routes of "new musicology": agendas
have changed, interests shifted, and music is valued differently.2
While the truth in this statement will be recognized by
anyone engaged in music analysis,I arguethat the real diffi-
culties behind the furtherprogressof genus theory are to be
found in the various theories themselves, or more precisely,
in their applicationto real musical objects. Anyone seeking
to deploythe genus theoriesof eitherForte or Parksto model
anything other than small-scale structures soon discovers
2 Ayrey 1998a, 163. It was partly in response to this situation that a sym-
posium devoted to pitch-class set genera was convened by Ayrey at the
Cambridge University Music Analysis Conference in 1997. Contribu-
tions to that symposium by Ayrey (1998a and b), Doerksen (1998),
Dunsby (1998), Forte (1998), Kennett (1998a and b) and Parks (1998a
and b) have since appeared in MusicAnalysis.

243
 244 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)
that such models often form far-from-perfectinterfaceswith
the music in question.However,while the difficultiesshould
not be underestimated,it is preciselyin the perceivedgap be-
tween model and object that meaningfulanalyticaldiscover-
ies lie. Only by addressingthese difficultiesin the context of
specific analysesis the potential of genus theory to be fully
realized.The point is made rathermore elegantlyby Parks:
I believe the fundamental object of both Forte's theory and mine-or,
for that matter, of any inclusion theory of pitch structure-is to facili-
tate modelling pitch structure in ways that render graspable, aspects of
structure that are otherwise elusive. In the case of set-class genera, the
positive analogy of the genus-model resides in correspondences be-
tween the properties and interrelations of its set-class members and
those of the musical passage being modeled. If the pitch-class sets of
the passage (as well as their properties and inclusion relations) corre-
spond to those of a particular genus-that is, if there is a "good fit"
between model and object-then the structural qualities that inhere in
the genus also inhere in the constructs that comprise the musical object;
therefore, whatever we know to be true about the genus in this regard
we also know to be true of the musical passage.3
The purpose of this article is to highlight some of the dif-
ficulties encountered in the practical application of a Parks-
style genus model to an extended musical work, and also to
demonstrate the significant rewards that may accrue from
the attention to minutiae upon which theories of genera
inevitably depend.4 Among issues to be addressed are the
statistical measures invoked in measuring the quantitative
correspondence ("good fit") between model and object, ap-
propriate means for determining the qualitative aspect of
this relationship, and the question of salience in the interpre-
3 Parks 1998a, 212.
4 The choice of a Parks-style model over the alternative system of genera
devised by Forte is made on the basis of a detailed comparison of these
genera models in the context of three works spanning almost thirty
years of Schuman's output. For an additional Forte-style perspective on
the work presented here as well as on the Third and Ninth Symphonies
of Schuman, see Pye 2000b.
tation of genus profiles.As a basis for the analysisto follow, a
brief introductionto Parks'ssystem is necessary.5
PARKS S THEORY OF SET-CLASS GENERA
For Parks, the construction of a genus or genera is a
process begun anew in the context of each analysis, in an
attempt to create the best possible theoretical model of the
individualwork or passage under consideration.6The genus
invoked comprises the network of inclusion relationships
(subsets or supersets, but without the Kh requirementfor
complement inclusion) about a chosen "cynosure"set class
(or set classes) that best mirrors the musical object.7The
cynosure(s)invoked may be of any cardinality,in contrastto
Forte'sexclusivelytrichordalprogenitors.8
5 I am indebted to Richard Parks for his careful reading of an earlier
draft of this paper and a number of helpful suggestions, and to David
Clarke who oversaw the project as a whole.
6 This is in direct contrast to the approach adopted by Forte, for whom
the genera model "offers an objective frame of reference for harmonic
materials, one that is independent of any particularcompositional prac-
tice, in the specific sense that none of the genera are derived empirically
from actual music, but, true to the Pythagorean heritage, are con-
structed entirely on a logical basis from a few primitives"(1988, 187-8).
7 The term "cynosure"(literally "guiding star; center of attraction or ad-
miration") and its less elegant extension "cynosural" is invoked in
Parks's original study (1989) and is retained here both for the sake of
continuityand to maintaina distinctionbetween it and Forte'stri-
chordal"progenitor."
The inclusionalcompromisedescribedhere betweenthe Forte'sK
and Kh relationshipis also proposed,in a modified form, by Larry
Soloman(1982, 72-3), establishing,"alevel of significancefor subsets
[wherebya] significantsubset... is definedas one whose cardinalityis
greaterthan half that of the superset,a moreselectiverelationthan the
subsetconcept[K] in ... [Forte1973] but less selectivethan the com-
plex Kh."For a typicallyrigorouspresentationof the theoreticalbasis
for suchinclusionbasedrelationships, see Morris1997.
8 While Parks'sgenerasystemwas originallypresentedin the contextof
his Debussystudy(1989), a moreabstracttheoreticalpresentationis to
be foundin Parks1998a.What followsis a digestof thatpresentation.
 246 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)
the model and understandingits propertiesin some mean-
ingful sense so that we can extend its positive analogyto the
object."13In the case of Parks'searlierstudy,the genera in-
voked were relativelyfew (five in all), and they were usually
based upon familiar pitch constructs (notably diatonic,
whole-tone, chromatic and octatonic formations).'4In such
cases, the characteristicset classes of a genus may be readily
identified.As the purviewof genera-basedanalysisexpands,
however, more obscure and complex genera will inevitably
present greaterdifficultiesof interpretation.l5The following
case studyillustratesthe point.
WILLIAM SCHUMAN'S SIXTH SYMPHONY
Completed in 1948, Schuman'sSixth Symphonypresents
a specific harmonic duality that operates on two levels: a
ratherloosely defined contrastof chromaticand diatonic ele-
ments, reflecting Vincent Persichetti's assessment of "the
heroic dualism caused by the resistance of the diatonic to
the chromatic,"l6and a focusing of that opposition in the
form of two "triadplus added-note"sonorities.17As seen in
Example 1, the first is the major-minor chord set-class
4-17[0347] and the second, the diatonic tetrachord
4-14[0237]. As the work unfolds, these two set classes are
13 Parks 1998a, 212.
I4 Parks 1989.
15 Consider, for example Parks's remarks regarding difficulties encoun-
tered in modeling the music of Berg and Schoenberg. (See Ayrey
1998b,233.)
I6 Schreiber & Persichetti 1954, 85.
I7 The initial objective of the analysis is to define this harmonic duality in
terms of specific genera. Before that can be achieved, however, the
characteristics of the duality must be discussed in more general terms.
To this end, the terms "chromatic"and "diatonic"will be retained for
the moment to convey Persichetti's broader meaning (diatonic resis-
tance to chromatic encroachment). Thus diatonic is defined in terms of
the familiar seven-note collection (7-35), while chromatic is used to
refer to formations that are non-diatonic, but (as will become apparent)
that often have some diatonic characteristics.In other words it is chro-
seen to underpin extensive sections of the music.18The re-
maining vertical sonorities supporting the opening theme
(to be identified as Theme A in upcoming Example 2) also
reflect this duality, forming either the chromatic subset of
4-17, 3-3[014],19 or alternativediatonicformations3-5[016]
and 4-23[0257].
Furthermore,a hierarchyof emphasisis clearlydiscernible
from the presentationof vertical sonorities in the opening
statement. The 4-17 sonority is projected unequivocally,
forming the first and second chordalformationsof the work,
and occurringfour times overall.It also forms a melodic seg-
ment within the theme itself (C#-Bk-F-D), while 4-14 is
heard only as the first vertical sonority of m. 3, and is also
formed by the first four bass notes of the work, C-D-Eb-G.
The rhythmicplacementof the verticalsonorities (in partic-
ular,the reiterationof 4-17 on the firstbeats of mm. 1 and 2,
and as the first sonority of the second harmonizedphrasein
m. 5), suggests not only that the clear presentationof these
vertical sonorities is a high priority in Schuman'sopening
statement, but also that 4-17 is to be afforded a degree of
priority.It is a view validatedacrossthe work as a whole (not
least in the closing measures), exemplifying, for Peter
Dickinson, "the major-minorchord [4-17] as [Schuman's]
own type of tonic."20
matic as in "chromatic harmony,"rather than the more rigorous "prod-
uct of the interval-class-1 cycle." Both terms are to some degree inade-
quate and will be superceded by specific genera in due course.
r8 The criteria for segmentation are of crucial importance to the validity
of any analysis such as that presented here. It would, however, be diffi-
cult to outline the specific criteria invoked within the necessary limita-
tions of space imposed. Instead, readers are referred to Pye 2000b,
where the issues are discussed and proceduresjustified with reference to
specific examples.
19 4-17 contains two trichordal subsets, one chromatic (3-3) and one dia-
tonic (3-11). First references to set classes in this study will use Forte's
label along with prime form; subsequent references will use only the
Forte label.
20 Dickinson 1985, 458.
 BESPOKE PITCH-CLASS SET GENERA IN WILLIAM SCHUMAN'S SIXTH SYMPHONY
of it as two great big anchors at the beginning and end; but I didn'tjust
think that when I was starting it, it just came as I was writing it.22
A similar analogywas employed by the conductorAntal
Dorati in a commentarywritten for the first performance,
referringto the function of the opening and closing sections
as like "thetwo pillarsof a bridge ... [that] hold and support
the span of the whole structure."23
Against this necessarily
schematicaccountof the work'sstructurethe 4-14/4-17 har-
monic dualitymay now be examinedin greaterdetail.
In order to provide a balancedaccountwithin reasonable
bounds of concision,discussionwill focus primarilyupon the
"firstmovement,"Moderato con moto. This movement pro-
jects the 4-14/4-17 opposition across three clearly defined
sections, and will providethe matrixof set classes for use in
constructingpossible generic models. Before fully exploring
the properties and characteristicsof any proposed model,
however,it is necessaryto examine the presentationof the
harmonicduality at a numberof key points acrossthe whole
work.24
The harmonicduality 4-14/4-17. As an aid to orientation
during the ensuing discussion, Example 3 displays the set
complexes (comprisingall sub- and supersetsof cardinalities
3 through 9) about the two principaltetrachords.25Of par-
ticular interest is the distinction between those set classes
that are exclusiveto one tetrachordonly (the outer columns)
and those that are held in common by both tetrachords
(centercolumn).
The opening Largo section promotes the idea of har-
monic opposition in the clearest terms. Two passages illus-
22 Interview with the composer cited in Clark 1982, 233-4.
23 Cited in Kolodin 1999,182.
24 For a more comprehensive account of the 4-14/4-17 duality across the
work as a whole, see Pye 2000b.
25 The genera models to be proposed embrace set classes of cardinality 3
to 9 only.
249
trate the manner in which Schuman projects this duality.
With the chromatic4-17 alreadyprioritizedin the harmo-
nization of the opening statement of Theme A, the subse-
quent statementof the theme, overwhich Theme B unfolds,
emphasizes4-14 as an alternativenorm. Beginning in m. 9,
Theme A is harmonizedby a combinationof 4-14 sonorities
and the full range of 4-14 trichordal subsets (3-2[013],
3-4[015], 3-9[027], and 3-11[037]) as Example 4 shows.26
The priority of 4-14 is established from the beginning,
forming the first four vertical sonorities, before the tri-
chordalsubsets are introduced.From m. 14, however,rhyth-
mic displacementin the part writing introduces a series of
contextually dissonant (that is, non 4-14) sonorities: set-
classes 4-10[0235], 3-3, 4-19[0148], 4-16[0157], and
3-7[025]. This broadeningout of the vertical-sonorityreper-
toire retains a clear distinction between what might be seen
as an extended orbit of diatonic formations (with 4-14 at
their center) and overtlychromaticsonorities.Thus, patterns
of localizedvoice leading show chromaticformationssuch as
4-19 resolvingin familiarways to diatonic set classes such as
4-16 (F to E; in m. 15), reaffirmingthe contextuallydefined
priorityof diatonic formationsin general terms and of 4-14
in particular.27
26 AlthoughThemeB emergesfromthesustained G towards the endof
thefirststatement ofThemeA (m.7),it is therestatement ofThemeA
in its newharmonic context(fromm. 9) thatis the focusof the seg-
mentation presented here.Forthe mostpart,the hornsandclarinets
providea harmonically stablebackdropfortheprojectionofThemeB,
withoccasional, significantly betweenmelodyand
placedintersection
accompaniment (see,forexample, the4-14 sonorities
formedbetween
melodyandaccompaniment in mm.12 and14).Fora moredetailed
considerationof ThemeB,seePye2000a.
27 The potentialforconfusion inherentin the term"contextual"is high-
lightedin Maus1999,191n. 52.As usedhere,it refersto theinterpre-
tationof particularevents(musical etc.)in relation
sonorities
gestures,
to otherevents(the"context") withintheboundsof a singlework.In
thisspecificsense,aneventis seento deriveits meaningfromits rela-
tionto othereventswithina closedsystem.Thisis in contrast to more
250 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)

Complex (4-14) Complex (4-14 and 4-17) Complex (4-17)

#3:2,4,9 #3:11 #3:3
#4:14 #4:17
#5:5,z17,z18,20,23,27,29 #5:11 #5: 16,21, 32
#6:5,9,zll, 18,z24,z25, z26, z29, 32,33, #6:8, z10,14,16,z19,31,z36,z46, z47 #6: z13, 15,20, 27, z44, z49, z50
z37,z38,z40,z41,z43
#7:5,7,9,14,19,24,34,35,z36 #7:2,3,4,6,10, 11,z12, 13,z17,z18,20, #7:16,31
21,22,23,25,26,27,29, 30, 32, z37, z38
#8:6,9,21 #8:1,2,3,4,5,7,8,10,11,12,13, 14,z15, #8:28
16,17,18,19,20,22,23,24,26,27, z29
#9: #9:1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 #9:
Total complex4-14 = 107 Total complex4-17 = 84

EXAMPLE3. Set complexes(cardinalities 3-9): 4-14 and 4-17.

Having thus consolidated the diatonic representativeof
the focal tetrachordalpair, the concluding measuresof the
introduction, mm. 32-49, shown as Example 5, are con-
cerned with foregroundingthe very idea of opposition.The
contrapuntalimposition of Theme C over the cyclic repeti-
tion of Themes A and B (mm. 25-34) culminatesin a return
to chordaltexturesthat performa cadentialfunction in mm.
32-4. A processof diatonic"crystallization" is witnessed here
as a succession of diatonic sonorities close out the section:
5-35[02479], 4-22[0247], 5-27[01358], 4-20[0158], and
6-33[023579]. In addition to their diatonic credentials (as
subsets of the diatonic collection 7-35[013568A]), the two
sets given particularrhythmic emphasis,5-27 and 6-33, are
also 4-14 supersets.The extent to which such sets might be
universal relations, such as those operative in functional tonality, for
example. Agawu (1989, 147-9) makes a similar distinction between
'aesthetic' (determined by immediate context) and acoustic (universal)
consonance.
ascribedparticularsignificancewithin a generic model will
be consideredbelow.
This local sense of closureis immediatelyfollowed by the
block-like juxtaposition of chordal passages, throwing the
4-14/4-17 harmonicdualityinto sharprelief The firstblock,
on horns and trombones (mm. 35-6), reasserts the 4-17
sonoritybefore a contrastingpassagein the strings sees 4-14
reemergefrom a successionof'4-17 type' chords (4-17, 3-3,
4-7[0145], 4-17, 4-19), suggestiveof a similarwider orbit of
sonoritiesaroundthe chromaticrepresentativeof the princi-
pal tetrachordalpair. The brass immediately respond, re-
asserting the primacy of 4-17 (m. 39). Such sectionalized
block forms may be seen as a hallmarkof Schuman'smature
style,with discreteinstrumentalgroupsplaying a crucialpart
in defining sectional structures and specific oppositions
within those structures.28Oppositions (harmonic,thematic,
28 In this deployment of instrumental groups Irving Kolodin (1999, 184)
sees the instruments "taking sides, pursuing lines of thought especially
suitable to their character."
252 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)

Vn. 1
32 K

Str.,WWV. Brass

' C I
_ I
- = i > i
I I I I
5-35 4-22 5-27 4-20 6-33 4-17 4-16 4-17 3-3 4-17 4-17

37 -. SoloVn.

Str.
Brass

W.W. 3-3 -3-4

9: y, +b4y ) _ 't ub -
I I I I I I I I I I
4-17 3-3 4-7 4-17 4-19 4-14 4-17 4-11 4-3 4-17

EXAMPLE5. Schuman, SymphonyNo. 6, mm. 32-49.

of 4-17. On the other hand, the polychord6-33, a productof
two major triads a tone apart [El, G, Bt} and [F, A, C],
forms a stronger,inclusionallink with 4-14.
The distributionof harmonicmaterialsduring the course
of this movement establishes a clear demarcationbetween
the sonorities identified in the opening statement,with the
4-17 and 4-14 chords representinga specific,focused mani-
festation of the broader chromatic/diatonic duality high-
lighted by Persichetti.The idea of opposition is communi-
cated most directly through the juxtaposition of discrete
blocks of material dominated by one or other of these
sonorities.That they may also be representedby their respec-
tive sub- or supersetsis apparentin the passagesdominated
by 4-14, and also in the associationof 4-17 and its only non-
tertian subset 3-3. From this perspective,the idea that the
principaltetrachordsmay be fulfilling a cynosuralrole in the
context of a clearly defined generic duality is a promising
one. There are, however,significant obstacles to such a tidy
interpretation.
In the first instance, the duality clearly extends beyond
the bounds of the tetrachordal set complexes shown in
Example 3, most obviously in terms of the additionaltetra-
chordsdeployed,but also in the extendeddiatonic/chromatic
orbits described above. The inadequacyis a reciprocalone;
just as not all diatonic set classes are members of the 4-14
complex, and not all chromatic set classes are members of
 BESPOKE PITCH-CLASS SET GENERA IN WILLIAM SCHUMAN'S SIXTH SYMPHONY
Vn.' ;
Str., Brass
4-14 '1~ ~~4-14
vl~~~~~ P~-
(c)
EXAMPLE 6(A)-(C).
chordal subset, 3-11, with Theme C projectedas a series of
parallel,root-position major triads.The sense of transition
is intensified by the anticipatory snare-drum roll heard
throughout this passage.The anticipation is fulfilled in m.
132 by the unequivocalstatementof the 4-17 sonorityin low
woodwind, brass,and strings (sonoromolto).
Example 11 (mm. 132-49) presents a pitch reduction
that eliminates melodic repetition, showing clearly segre-
gated instrumental strata that juxtapose sustained chords
(brass,low woodwind, and strings) against fast melodic for-
mations,taking the Theme C head motive as a startingpoint 30
for further development (violins, violas, upper woodwind).
The constituentpartsof the sonority (triadplus added-note)
are foregrounded,with the majortriad {F, A, C} given par-
255
8-22 (melody)
(bass) 8-22 (collection)
[continued]
ticularprominencein the timpani.30The 4-17 sonority pre-
dominates not only in the sustainedbrass chordsbut also in
the thickening melodic line of upper strings and woodwind,
refocusing the harmonicallyneutral setting of the previous
triadicsection.
Within the sustainedchordalblocks,the 4-17 sonoritydoes
not hold sway exclusively.In particular,diatonic formations
often intrudeto form a quasi-cadential"other,"resolvedin the
context of the prevailing4-17 harmonic norm. The timpani
Although pitch centricity clearly has an important role to play in the
overall structure of this and other works in Schuman's oeuvre, the ob-
jective of this case study (pitch-class set-class genera) precludes further
consideration here. For more on this topic, see Pye 2000b.
258 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)

Melodic (Theme A) #3: 2,6 #4: 24 triad {F#, A, C#} heard in mm. 134, 136, and 137 mediates
#5: 9, z12,20,33 #6: z3, z25 between one such cadentialsuccession.In m. 134, for exam-
Melodic (Theme B) #5: 9,23 #6: z29, 34 ple, it forms part of a 4-17 sonority,but in m. 136 it is heard
#7:35 #8:27 against a 4-14 chord, [Ft, Al, A, Cb}, combining with it to
Vertical #3: 4, 7 #4: 4, 10, 11, 14, form the diatonic hexachord 6-32[024579]. The resolution
is achievedvia the subsequent(diatonic)brasschord 3-5 {A,
16,17, 19,20,22
#5: 5,11, z17, #6: 14,16, zl9, Bb, Eb}, combining with the same timpani triad to form the
4-17 superset 5-32[01469]. Similar cadentialjuxtapositions
z18,20,21,23, z25,z40
characterizemm. 143-6. Note in particularthe voice leading
27,29,32, z38
-so redolent of functional tonality-that sees the 4-17
chord of m. 146 transformedinto a 4-14 sonority by the
EXAMPLE7. Pitch-class set data: mm. 80-93.
shift from E to D in the trombonesbeforeresolvingonto the
4-17 sonorityof m. 147. The sense of tension and resolution
is once again reinforcedin other domains, most notably the
Melodic #3: 2,6,7,8 #4:11,14,20,28 snare-drumroll and crescendo. As in the case of the earlier
#5: 2,z12,21,29 #6:z3,z19,z46 section dominated by 4-14, however, the primary sonority
#7:z38 (in this case, 4-17) acts only as the privilegedfocus of more
Vertical #3: 4,11 #4:14,16,17, 20,22 diffuse diatonic/chromaticduality:not all chords of resolu-
#5: z17,20,21 tion are sonoritiesbelonging to the 4-17 complex.
This tripartitestructure(mm. 80-122, 123-31, 132-68)
EXAMPLE 8. Pitch-class set data: mm. 94-104.
encapsulatesthe play of harmonicforces at work throughout
the symphony.In simple terms, the triad-dominatedcentral
section can be seen to mediate between the principal har-
Melodic (Theme A) #3: 6, 8, 11 #4: z15 monic protagonists via a common subset. Perhaps more
Melodic (Theme B) #5: 1,9,35 #4: 11,16,27 significant, however, is the association of the neutral triad
#7:35 #6: z3,32, 33 (3-11, a subset of both 4-14 and 4-17) with Theme C, em-
#9:10 #8:22 phasizing a sense of otherness in theme and harmonyalike.
Vertical #4:14,16,19,20,22 The set classes outlined in these passages are presented in
#5: 5,11, 13, #6: 32, 33 Examples 12 and 13.
z17, z18,20, The projection of this clearly defined and manageably
21,23,24,27, compact three-partstructuremakes the movement an ideal
29,30, 34,35, subject upon which to base a generic model of pitch struc-
z37, z38 ture. An effective model must put the relationshipbetween
#7:21 the principaltetrachordsand those sonoritiesassociatedwith
Collection: #8:22 them-either by inclusion or the more general diatonic/
chromaticcategorization-on a more formalfooting. Such a
EXAMPLE 9. Pitch-class set data: mm. 105-23. model will be requirednot only to embracethe orbit of set
classes associatedwith each tetrachordbut also to character-
 .

BESPOKE PITCH-CLASS SET GENERA IN WILLIAM SCHUMAN'S SIXTH SYMPHONY 259

123WW., Tpt. 131 F9

_ _I_ _ L. 6 h
e123n : , t 7 7 ...^. h..... -F I|m-
-*
:JI'1-
S 4u -'I v. - -I

Sn. Dr.
1 1(al
' I
3-1 IP-
3-11 (all) Timp. 3 3

t
4-17 (Timp. 3-11)

EXAMPLE IO(A). Schuman, SymphonyNo. 6, mm. 123ff

7-10 ~1~ 7-32

6-8 5-20 .^-. .>
/4. b -
L
64 --, 4-13--1 L-. h- 6 -_&. - -

3-2 - -
3-4---1
fpf
6-31

7-10 7-6 7-z12

;l
~~128
t ---- ' 4-16 i b 4~l~~ btl 67-z3i7- rllYl
, ,f b,16 L-J _

3 3--
6-z38

EXAMPLE IO(B). Schuman, SymphonyNo. 6, mm. 123-31, melodyonly.

ize the nature of the relationshipsbetween them. Why, for A GENERIC MODEL OF HARMONIC DUALITY

example, are certain set classes affordeda particularpriority

(saliency)at points of structuralimport?In other words, it is
not enough simply to account for the set classes encoun-
tered;the model should also reflectthe characteristicsof the
set-classstructureof the music at some level (recallingParks's
"PreferenceRules").31Such a model may allow us to make
further,and more informed,observationsabout this music.
The need to reducethe numberof potential cynosuresto
manageable proportions prompts a reappraisalof Parks's
preferencerules,32at least at this initial stage in the proce-
dure.The desire for the generic model to conform closely to
the objectin statisticalterms (Rules 1 and 3) is not in dispute,
but from a pragmaticstandpoint,when faced with as many

3I Parks 1998, 211. 32 Parks 1998,211.

260 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)

8-12 (melody) r 9-2 (melody) b

rW.W., Str. 6:z49 Brass W.W., Str., 6-27 -4-7 tr
Brass
AL Brass -,--0
^
132 hk k-.k
k-.- 41I ,t =-6=-IL
A rC^^ ^ ^ ^ ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~AI
- b- V -< - q - . E
I / b" q W
V. ts V. V etc. etc.

T Timp.4-17

i b3-11eL | it ......... r o
4-17 4-17 3-11

Brass
r 9-11 (melody) r 8-z29(melody)
r 8-17(melody) .6-27 4-17 3-6 3-8 3-7 32
136 -tr

_,I
kV {i$ ^ I ;n I Ina
v- I -
---4-17
EI I

I;;rr. LLLrrrrr< =::r r

etc. etc.

3-11 - 311
1.
":L~,b, 3 6, "
; -^
-%;It * _W.I,
#'
_ Vu,l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_, Ir'I
3
t 2
_5-3
4-14 3-5 41
4-17
-6-32- L-5-32-i

EXAMPLE II. No. 6, mm.132-49.

Schuman,Symphony

potential cynosuresas there are set classes in the database,it then, is not for the single genus that best embracesthe ma-
makes sense to assess the claims of set classes exhibiting a trix in statistical terms, but rather for two largely comple-
high level of saliency in the first instance (invoking Rule 4). mentarygenerathat taxonomizethe sense of differencemost
This is not to rule out the possibilitythat the set-class struc- clearly represented by the tetrachords 4-14 and 4-17. As
ture may be governedto some extent by a cynosurethat does suggested above, an ideal model will define not only those
not manifest itself overtlyas a featureof the musical surface, factorsthat differentiatebetween opposing sonorities,but it
but it does ensurethat the eventualmodel bearsas close a re- will also accommodate and clarify areas of ambiguity.One
lationship as possible to those set classes seen to characterize such areawas reflectedin the significantintersection of the
the music in question. complexes about 4-14 and 4-17, but another stemmed from
An additionalfactor to be consideredin the present case the inexact accordanceof the 4-14 complexwith the broader
is the need to reflect the harmonic duality articulatedwith diatonic classificationand the converse,though less exten-
such clarity in the examples considered above. The search, sive, misalignment of the 4-17 complex and the chromatic
 262 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)

Melody #3: 2, 4 #4: 13,16 Set 4-17 7-35 Saliency

#5:20 #6:8,31,z38 4-17 / X pervasive
#7: 6,10, z12,32 X verticalmm. 5, 6, 35-47, 140
3-3
Vertical #3:11
(Exx. 1, 5, 11)
5-21 X cadence m. 104 (Ex. 6b)
EXAMPLE I2. Pitch-classset data:mm.123-31. 6-27 $ X melody m. 135, m. 138 (Ex. 11)
6-z49 / melody m. 133 (Ex. 11)
7-21 x cadencem. 105 (Ex. 6b)
8-17 / melody m. 138 (Ex. 11)
Melody #3: 2, 3, 6, 7, 8,11 #4: 7,12,13, z15, 17,18
#5:33 #6:27, z49
#7:2 #8: 12,17, z29 Set 4-14 7-35 Saliency
#9: 2, 11 4-14 / / Pervasive
Vertical #3: 3, 5, 11 #4: 3,14, 17, 19, 20, 23 3-4 / / verticalmm. 40-2 (Ex. 5)
#5:20,22,32, 35 #6:32 5-27 / / cadence m. 33, m. 93 (Exx. 5, 6a)
#7:z37 6-32 / / cadence m. 136 (Ex. 11)
6-33 / / cadence m. 34, m. 48 (Ex. 5)
EXAMPLEI3. Pitch-class set data: mm. 132-68. 8-22 / / collection/melodymm. 119-23
(Ex. 6c)
with the total set matrix for the Moderatomovement as is
chartedbelow. of the 4-14/4-17 duality.
EXAMPLE14. Prominent representatives
Three statistical measures are deployed. In the first in-
stance potential cynosuresare ranked accordingto their in-
clusional intersection with the matrix (% of matrix). The whereby the limits placed upon large set-class complexes in
second measure (Squo) is based upon the statistical opera- the context of small matrices (deprivinglarge complexes of
tion proposed in Forte 1988 whereby account is also taken the opportunityto fulfill their Squo potential)is addressed.34
of the size of the cynosuralset complex, redressingto some The percentage of potential measures the Squo ranking
extent the disadvantageexperiencedby small set-class com- achievedby each complex againstthe maximumSquo that is
plexes in the context of large matrices.33The final measure theoreticallypossible for that complex,given the restrictions
(% of potential) derives from the work of Kennett 1998b, imposed by the size of the matrixin question.35Examples15
and 16 show these measuresin action.
33 While promulgatedin the contextof his own ratherdifferentsystemof
genera, Forte'smeasureproves to be equallyuseful here. The Squo
rankingis determinedas follows(Forte1988, 232): Squo (Ga) = ((X / 34 Kennett 1998b, 189-91.
Y) / Z) * 10, where (paraphrasingForte)X representsthe numberof 35 In the case of a matrix of eighty-three set classes (as here) the maxi-
genusrepresentativespresentin the matrix,Y is the totalnumberof set mum Squo achievable is 120. Set-class complexes (potential genera)
classesin the matrix,and Z is the size of the genus (sc complex)in containing significantly more than eighty-three set classes may, there-
question.Forconveniencethe totalis multipliedby 10. fore, be disadvantaged as they are incapable of achieving this matrix
 BESPOKE PITCH-CLASS SET GENERA IN WILLIAM SCHUMAN S SIXTH SYMPHONY 263

In the case of the 4-14 orbit, the extended collection

Set %of matrix Set Squo Set %of potential
8-22[0123568A] embracesthe largestproportionof the ma-
8-22 73.5 7-35 .084 8-22 73.7 trix, but such is the extent of its embracethat it is unable to
3-4 68.7 8-22 .070 7-35 70.0 distinguish between set classes characteristicof the funda-
4-14 49.4 6-32 .069 3-4 69.2 mental opposition (not least the tetrachords4-14 and 4-17
7-35 36.1 6-33 .064 6-32 57.5 themselves).
6-33 33.7 5-27 .050 6-33 53.3 A similar problem afflicts the trichord 3-4, a prominent
5-27 33.7 4-14 .046 4-14 49.5 subset of 4-14 certainly,but also a component of set classes
6-32 22.9 3-4 .045 5-27 41.7 that appearto have little in common with the diatonic char-
acter of 4-14 (even at the tetrachordallevel, for example:
4-4, 4-7, 4-19). Other measuresalso militate against these
EXAMPLE 15. Engagement ofprominent 4-14/diatonic sets with
the matrix. set classes,most notablythe Squo rankings,which highlight
the extent to which these large complexesare not engagedby
the matrix of eighty-three set classes. Only 8-22 performs
well in this regard (its lack of discrimination in terms of
Set %of matrix Set Squo Set %of potential characteristicsubsets notwithstanding), but its claims are
8-17 67.5 8-17 .080 8-17 67.2 outweighed in statistical terms by the most obvious candi-
3-3 60.2 7-21 .079 7-21 65.8 date, the diatonic collection 7-35. Although it engages only
7-21 50.6 6-27 .067 3-3 60.9 36.1% of the matrix, 7-35 does offer the highest degree of
4-17 36.1 6-z49 .056 6-27 55.8 correspondencebetween model and object, as revealed by
6-27 31.3 5-21 .047 6-z49 46.7 the Squo ranking.In addition,it is not far behind the much
5-21 30.1 4-17 .043 5-21 39.2 larger complexes in terms of the percentage of generative
6-z49 24.1 3-3 .039 4-17 36.1 potential realized in the matrix. The statistical evidence
enhancesthe intuitive claim of the complex about 7-35 to be
EXAMPLEI6. Engagement of prominent 4-1 7/non-diatonic sets representative of the wider orbit of 4-14 associated set
with the matrix. classes.
The searchfor a suitablecynosureon the chromatic,4-17
side of the divide is subject to the same criteria,with the
The requirementthat the model should distinguish be- statisticaldata outlined in Example 16. As the complement
tween set classes that are unequivocalrepresentativesof the of the primarytetrachord,the set 8-17[01345689] is likely
respective4-14 (diatonic) or 4-17 (chromatic)orbits counts to be located towardthe center of the proposedgenus, and it
against a number of set-class complexes that otherwise performswell in statisticalterms, achievingthe highest Squo
perform well in statistical terms, as shown in Example 15. rankingand realizingalmost 70%of its generativepotential.
As a prospectivecynosure,however,it fails to provide suffi-
maximum Squo. Thus the percentage of potential measures the Squo cient definition of the harmonic duality at lower cardinali-
achieved by each complex against either its own potential maximum, or ties. In fact, suitablecandidatesby this criterionare few and
that of the matrix, whichever is the lower. For a more comprehensive far between. Only one set class discriminates effectively
analysis of these issues see Pye 2000b. acrossa range of cardinalities,the trichord3-3. In its favoris
264 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)
its abilityto embracealmost all those set classes not encom-
passedby the 7-35 complexwhile at the same time intersect-
ing with it only in the realmsof cardinalitieseight and nine.
It is thus highly differentiatedfrom the opposing (diatonic)
orbit of set classes and, as the chromatic representativeof
only two trichordalsubsets found in 4-17, highly character-
istic of the work's"tonic"sonority.What cannot be ignored,
however,is the poor performanceof 3-3 against Preference
Rule 3, as indicatedby its low Squo ranking.Of the promi-
nent set classes considered, it performs least well by this
measure. The complex contains no fewer than 156 set
classes,and might be expectedto realizemore than 60.9%of
its generative potential in the context of a comparatively
small matrix.
Directly related to the problem of the profligacyof the
3-3 complex is the lack of a finer degree of definition pro-
vided by either of the two complementarygenera. Simple
generaemanatingfrom the cynosures7-35 and 3-3 providea
clear-cut distinction between those set classes characterized
as diatonic and those deemed chromatic,but as yet no theo-
retical means is available to isolate the inner orbit of set
classes, those specificallyassociatedwith the primarytetra-
chords by inclusion.The very decisivenessof the distinction
between the complexes about 3-3 and 7-35 is also a handi-
cap to the effective modeling of those degrees of ambiguity
noted above.An effective solution to these problemsis pro-
vided by the creation of complex genera invoking both the
specific (inner orbit) tetrachordalcynosuresand the broader
complementarycomplexes.The resultantgenera are shown
as Example 17 (genus 3-3/4-17) and Example 18 (genus
4-14/7-35). The examples follow the layout adopted by
Parks 1998a with minor modifications. All the set classes
representedin the genus (the model) arelisted by cardinality,
with those present in the music (the object) shaded. The
number of set classes of each cardinalityrepresentedin the
genus are also noted (italics).
The advantagesof such an approachare most clearly il-
lustratedin relationto the complex genus 3-3/4-17 (Ex. 18).
The combination of the cynosuralcomplexes adds only one
furtherset class to the original3-3 complex (the 4-17 subset
3-11), but the benefit of the new model is found in the
distinction that may now be drawn between those primary
set classes (common to both complexes) at the heart of the
genus, and those secondary set classes associated with the
genus via only one of the cynosuralpair. Example 17 illus-
tratesan immediatebenefit of the conflation,as a largenum-
ber of the 3-3 complex set classes that previouslydiluted the
intersection of model and object are relegatedto secondary
status.Thus, the intuitive associationof additionalchromatic
tetrachords(4-7, 4-19) with the prevailing4-17 sonority-
observed, for example, in the instrumental blocks of Ex-
ample 5-is now achieved via their common subset (and
joint cynosure),3-3.
Comparison of the proposed complex genera highlights
their distinctiveness at low cardinalities.Of equal interest,
however,are the few set classes claiming joint membership
of both complex genera.The triad 3-11, for example,is the
only trichordcommon to both genera,but as a primaryset of
the genus 4-14/7-35 it is (predictably) associated more
stronglywith that genus. Although a more detailedcompari-
son of the two genera may be found elsewhere,36it is worth
noting here the statusof the hexachords6-z49 and 6-27 that
were isolated as principalmelodic formationsin Example 11
(see mm. 133, 135, 138). Their role in the melodic manifes-
tation of the 3-3/4-17 genus is confirmedhere; they are the
only primaryhexachordalmembers of the genus owing no
secondaryallegianceto the opposing genus.
Although the correspondence of model to object is
markedlyimprovedby the invocation of the complex genus,
the small size of both cynosuresstill produceslarge numbers
of high-cardinalityset classes(twenty-fiveof the twenty-nine
possible octads, and all of the nonads). The essence of the
problem,and its partialsolution can be illustratedin consid-
ering the set-class 8-22. The collection 8-22 is a familiar
36 Pye 2000b,254-6.
 BESPOKE PITCH-CLASS SET GENERA IN WILLIAM SCHUMAN S SIXTH SYMPHONY 265

3-3 Counts:156
#3 1
#4 9 2 3 1 7:2:1 1 18
#5 25 3 4 6 8 i9Il 10 14 16 19 26 28 0 31 :32 36 7. 38
#6 43 1 2 3 4 5 6 8: 9 10 11 12 13 :4 15 1:..6.,17 18 1 20 21 22 23 24 27 28
29 30 34 36 37 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46-, 47 48 4 50
#7 37 1 3 4 5 6_ 7 8 9 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 '1i 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 i 32 33 34 36
#8 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 2B1223 24 25 26 7 282:Z9:
#9 12 1 i 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

4-17 Counts:84
#3 2 3 1i
#4 1
#5 4 16 21: 3
#6 16 8:l 10 13 14 15 1 20 36 44 46 47 i49 50
#7 24 2 3 4 6:- 1011 1i 13 16 17 18 20 U21 22 23 25 26 27 29 30 3132: 37 38
#8 25 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 10 11 1E2 13 14 15 16 17: 18 19 20 !22: 23 24 26 i27i 28 2i
#9 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 il0

Primarysets Counts:82
#3 1 3:
#4 1 :7
#5 4 16 2132
#6 16 8 10 13 14 15 20 271.-.31 36 44 i6 47 !i!49 50
#7 23 211 3 4 6 10, 11 2 13 16 17 18 20 Iii^2122 23 25 26 27 29 31 32.37: 38
#8 25 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 10 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 24 26 i2 28 29
#9 12 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ili10 !: 12

Secondary sets Counts: 75

#3 1 11
#4 8 215 ::,:9
#5 21 3 4 6 8 1 10 3i 14 1!7 8 19 221 26 28 3I0i 31 36 37?38
#6 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 11 12 17 18 21 22 23 24 28 :2911:30 3:~.437 39 40 41 42 43
45 48
#7 14 1 5 7 8 9 14 15 19 24 28 30 33 34 36
#8 4 6 9 21 25

Genustotal:157
EXAMPLE17. Complex genus 3-3/4-17.
 266 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)
sonority not only in Schuman'searly diatonically oriented
music,but also in the music of other twentieth-centurycom-
posers,including Bartok and Milhaud.37It is a close relative
of the extended diatonic collection 8-23[0123578A] (a
productof the diatonic fifths-cycle),but in the case of 8-22,
the diatonic cycle is seen to skip one revolution,producing,
for want of a better term, a secondarydiatonic collection.38
In the present context it is intuitively associatedwith the 4-
14 (diatonic) orbit of set classes, most clearlyin the conclu-
sion to the first principalsection of the Moderatomovement
shown in Example 6(c). The tendency of both complex gen-
era toward profligacyin high cardinalitiesresults in this set
class being affordedprimarystatus in both, as Examples 18
and 19 demonstrate.That 8-23 is more strongly associated
with the genus 4-14/7-35, however,is revealedby patternsof
intervaldistributionthat determinethose set classes deemed
"characteristic"of a genus, a topic now to be addressed.
CHARACTERISTIC SET CLASSES: GENUS 4-I4/7-35
AND GENUS 3-3/4-I7
Characteristicset classes of a genus are those set classes
most closely associatedwith the cynosure(s)-which is to say,
those in the innermost orbit of set classes embracedby the
genus as a whole. Having establishedthe propertiesof the
model in abstractterms, it is then necessaryto "extendits
positive analogyto the object,"to assess,in other words, the
extent to which those characteristicsreflectthe propertiesand
interrelationsof set classesidentifiedin a musicalpassage.
For set classes to be seen as "characteristic,"
it will be re-
called, they are requiredto exhibit "allor some"of the three
qualities cited above.The apparentlatitude in these criteria
37 See Antokoletz 1984 and Harrison 1997.
38 Thus the "secondary"collection 8-22 is formed from the "gapped"dia-
tonic cycle: C-G-D-A-E-B-F#-( )-G#. Such pitch formations are
examined by Harrison 1997, who refers to them as products of a "sec-
ond derivative series."
reflectsthe varyingdegreesof"characteristicness" displayedby
differentgenera.As will become clear,some cynosuresproject
very distinctiveintervallicprofilesexhibitingstrongties with a
limited numberof similarlycharacterizedset classes,creating
thereby a tightly focused inner orbit of set classes. Other
cynosures,however, may present rather diffuse patterns of
association,presentingthe analystwith a number of equally
persuasivealternativeassociations.It is thus possible, within
the above criteria,to refine the theoretical model to reflect
most accuratelythe constructsand qualitiesof the music. In
the present case, the two complex genera under considera-
tion are markedlydifferent, each posing different problems
associatedwith the isolation of characteristicset classes.
In the light of their close inclusional relationship, it
comes as little surprise to note that the characteristicset
classes generatedindependentlyby 3-3 and 4-17 are closely
related,as shown in Example 19. The examplelists the char-
acteristic sets, their interval vectors, and successive-interval
arrays(sia).It will be recalledthat uniformityin the distribu-
tion of intervalclasseswithin intervalvectors, or patternsof
interval-class distribution within successive-intervalarrays,
are qualities evinced by "characteristic members of a
genus."39While it would be perfectly possible to regardall
the set classes listed here as characteristicof the complex
genus, the desire to refine the intersectionof model and ob-
ject suggests a more selective approach.The methodology
will restrictthe searchto those set classes exhibiting both a
high level of intersectionwith the cynosuresand similarpat-
terns of intervaldistribution.Thus, the emphasison interval
classes 1, 3, and 4 in the vectors of 3-3 and 4-17 should be
furtherreflectedin the vectors of set classes deemed charac-
teristic of each cynosure.40Such a distributionis a particular
39 Parks 1998a, 209.
40 The emphasis placed upon these interval classes thus homes in on the
difference between the primary tetrachords 4-14 and 4-17, downplay-
ing the role of ic-5 common to both as a feature of their shared triadic
subset, 3-11.
 BESPOKE PITCH-CLASS SET GENERA IN WILLIAM SCHUMAN S SIXTH SYMPHONY26 267

4-14 Counts: 107

#3 4 2 74 9 11
#4 1
#5 8 5 .11 17 1 2 23 27 29
#6 24 5 8 9 10 11 14 16 18 19 24 25 26 29 31 32 3 36 37 38 40 4 43 ,46 ] 47
#7 31 2 45679 01 113 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 29
30 32343 36378
#8 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .417 18 19 20 21 22~ 23 24
26 27.. 29
#9 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 110 11 12

7-35 Counts:43 Primsarysets

#3 9 #3 4
#4 13 26 27.1 29 #4 1
#5 9 #5 4
#6 4 #6 4
#7 1 #7 1
#8 3 #8 3
#9 4 #9 4

Secondarysets
#3 5
#4 12 -2 1
26 27~::/
#5 9
#6 20 58 9 10 11 1'- 161~11~
18 19. 24 29 1 6 37 38,-40 41 43 46 47
#7 30 2 43 5 6 7 ~~~910 1 12 3 14 17 18 1 20 211111! 22 23 24 25 26 27 29
30 3 34 36 37 8
#8 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 13 14 15 16 171. 18 19 20 21 242729
#9 8 12 3 4 5 8 10 1

Genus total:129

EXAMPLE I8. Complexgenus4 14/7 35.

 268 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)

Characteristicsets (complex3-3) Characteristicsets (complex4-17)

sc iv sia sc iv sia
9-3 767763 1-1-1-1-1-1-2-1-3 9-3 767763 1-1-1-1-1-1-2-1-3
8-19 545752 1-1-2-1-1-2-1-3 8-17 546652 1-2-1-1-1-2-1-3
7-21 424641 1-1-2-1-3-1-3 7-21 424641 1-1-2-1-3-1-3
6-15 323421 1-1-2-1-3-4 6-20 303630 1-3-1-3-1-3
5-21 202420 1-3-1-3-4 5-21 202420 1-3-1-3-4
4-19 101310 1-3-4-4 4-17 102210 3-1-3-5
3-3 101100 1-3-8 3-3 101100 1-3-8

EXAMPLE 19. Characteristicsetsfor complexes3-3 and 4-17.

feature of the pentachord 5-21[01458], for example, a set
class that is also strongly associatedwith both cynosuresin
inclusional terms via its complement 7-21[0124589]. No
other seven-note set class embraces 3-3 and 4-17 to an
equivalentextent.41
The mutually enhancing attributes of intervallic defini-
tion and high inclusivity are featuresof complementaryset
classes that are denied characteristichexachords.In the case
of 3-3, the interval vector of the chosen set-class 6-15 re-
flects once again the characteristicemphasis upon interval-
classes 1, 3, and 4, but it is only one of several hexachords
intersectingwith 3-3 four times.42On the 4-17 side of the
genus, the highly distinctivehexachord6-20[014589] forms
strong inclusionalrelationshipswith the cynosureand all the
41 The cynosure 3-3 intersects with 7-21 seven times, intersecting with no
other seven-note set class more than five times. The same is true for 4-
17: three times, no other more than twice.
42 They are: 6-zl0[013457], 6-14[013458], 6-15[012458], 6-z19[013478]
and 6-z44[012569]. An additional operation of value in the isolation of
characteristic set classes has been suggested by Richard Parks (personal
correspondence), namely Richard Cohn's (1988) concept of transposi-
tional combination (TC). Thus the marginally more characteristic in-
terval vector of 6-15 is confirmed in the TC operation combining the
cynosure with itself: 3-3*3-3 = 6-15.
other characteristicset classes.43There can be little doubt as
to its characteristicstatus at a theoretical level, reflecting
both the emphasisupon interval-classes1, 3, and 4, and the
successive-intervalarraysequence 1-3-1-3 characteristicof
the 5-21/7-21 complement pair. As will become apparent,
however, this hexachord is less easily reconciled with the
musicalobject.
The hexachordalexamplesillustratean additionalfeature
of some characteristicset classes, notably that two or more
set classes may mediate between set classes of immediately
higher and lower cardinalities with equal effectiveness in
terms of the distribution of intervals across both interval
vectors and successive-intervalarrays.The intervalvectors of
the two hexachords, shown in Example 20, illustrate the
point. At interval-class2, set-class 6-15 mediates most ef-
fectivelyin the directionof 7-21, whereasat interval-class4,
it is more readily associatedwith 5-21. The situation is re-
versed with respect to 6-20. A concomitant inclination to-
ward either pentachordalor septachordalneighboris evident
43 The complex about 6-20 is extremely small (19 set classes), with
5-21/7-21 the only penta-/septachordal sub-/supersets. The remainder
of the complex comprises: cardinal 3/9: 3, 4, 11, 12; cardinal 4/8: 7, 17,
19,20.
 BESPOKE PITCH-CLASS SET GENERA IN WILLIAM SCHUMAN S SIXTH SYMPHONY
Set v e c t o r Set v e c t o r
7-21 4 2 4 6 4 1 7-21 4 2 4 6 4 1
6-15 3 2 3 4 2 1 6-20 3 0 3 6 3 0
5-21 2 02420 5-21 202420
EXAMPLE 20. of intervalvectors:genus3-3/4-17.
Comparison
in their respective successive-interval arrays, but on balance
the two hexachords fulfill the criteria for characteristic status
with equal effectiveness.44
The characteristic set classes isolated in relation to each
of the twin cynosures 3-3 and 4-17 represent coherent and
theoretically sound groupings both in terms of their interval-
lic properties and their mutual inclusivity. But to what extent
can they be deemed characteristic of the music under exami-
nation? Further refinement of the model shows that the role
of 4-17 as principal focus of the chromatic set-class orbit
projected in the music prompts the elimination of the 4-
19/8-19 pair from the final list of characteristic set classes.
The close relationship between the 3-3 cynosure and set-
class 4-19 does much to account for the tetrachord's promi-
nence as a 4-17 substitute, most notably in the context of the
work's introduction (Examples 4 and 5). The cynosure 3-3,
meanwhile, is heard most prominently in other sections of
the work, not least in the concluding measures of the first in-
troduction, illustrated in Example 5. Within the Moderato
movement, the characteristic complement pairing 5-21/7-21
formed the prominent cadential gesture shown as Example
6(b), mm. 104-5.
The only significant discrepancy between theory and
practice lies in the choice of characteristic hexachord, and
the lack of prominence afforded set classes of cardinalities
44 A similarly ambivalent relationship pertains between the cardinal 4/8
complement pairs and the set classes of cardinal 3/9 and 5/7 on either
side of them.
269
eight and nine. The set-class 6-20 was shown to characterize
the 4-17 orbit of set classes with particularrigor,but it is a
set class that is conspicuousby its absence in the music at
any point, a fate also sharedby the 3-3 characteristichexa-
chord 6-15. It must be admitted that, in the context of pas-
sages of the work examinedabove,there is no clearcandidate
for the role of characteristichexachord for the proposed
genus 3-3/4-17. A candidate does present itself toward the
conclusion of the work, however,in the form of the hexa-
chord 6-z19, underpinningthe final statement of Theme D,
shown in Example 21.45It is only marginallyless character-
istic in theoreticalterms, and it fulfils the criteriafor inclu-
sivity and intervaldistributionmost satisfactorily.An expla-
nation for Schuman'sevident preference for this sonority
over an alternativedisplayingintervalliccharacteristicsmore
centralto the 4-17 orbit may lie in the polychordaldisposi-
tion of manyverticalsonoritiesin the work. For example,the
hexachord6-33, heard to characterizea number of diatonic
juncturesin the music,is usuallyheardas a polychord,super-
imposing two major triads a tone apart. The hexachord
6-z19 may be seen as its chromatic (in Persichetti'ssense)
opposite, taking the form of two minor triads a semitone
apart. Of the theoretical alternatives,6-15 cannot be pre-
sented as a polychord,and although 6-20 may take the form
of a major triad and a minor triad (for example:[A, C, E}
[C#, E#, G#}), it forms (arguably)a less balancedcounterpart
to its major/majoropposite number6-33.
In common with the numericallack of engagementin the
music at cardinalitieseight and nine, it is also difficultto un-
derstandthe set classes 8-17 and 9-3 as entirelycharacteris-
tic of the music.The cynosuralcomplement 8-17 forms the
third melodic unit outlined in Example 11 (m. 138), but it is
one of several large set classes formed by the distinctive
block-likejuxtapositionsencounteredduring this passage.It
retainsits characteristicstatusprimarilyby virtue of its posi-
tion as cynosural complement. The characteristicstatus of
45 See mm. 649-50, 651, and 654.
270 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)

Hn.

Tpt.
,i, 1- I-- I, I1~n [, S1 ~1~ ~~1
r ^r
^-^
7M^
7^ f >
Trb. 9 :.#:
(4 -
Tba.
9.yc J b v
^ J ^J.

Cym. " r7 r,
fff
w- 7 h F ? r IrT? f r q-7- -
p
P,fff mf fff
t I t I I t t t t
5-20 5-20 5-20 4-20 6-18 4-20 5-19 4-17 6-33 6-32 6-32 6-z19
(6-z38)

650

Hn.

I~' f'y _ 1
_
Tpt.

9: ! - h L Eb-f - r Ir ;
Trb.

1fff
Tba. i - ~ ~ ~ 7

Cym.
Y r I I K ' I I Y Y
K
-z fff ----fff
t I t t I 1
6-z19 6-33 4-17 5-22 4-17 6-zl9 6-zl9

EXAMPLE21. Schuman, SymphonyNo. 6, mm. 645-54.

 BESPOKE PITCH-CLASS SET GENERA IN WILLIAM SCHUMAN S SIXTH SYMPHONY 27I

the cynosuralcomplement9-3 receivesno clearprojectionin SC iv sia

the music. Its eliminationfrom the final list of characteristic
set classes serves to highlight the weighting toward lower
cardinalitiesthat is itself a characteristicof the music.
With these modifications,the characteristicset classesfor
the complex genus 3-3/4-17 are displayed in Example 22.
The proposed genus can thus not only provide an effective
model of the 4-17/chromatic aspect of the harmonicduality
in quantitativeterms, but also highlight at a theoreticallevel
the close associationbetween a numberof prominentsonori-
ties in the music and their place at (or toward)the center of
the genus.
Characteristicset classesfor the complexgenus 4-14/7-35
are determined by a similar process, with Example 23 dis-
playing those characteristicof the joint cynosures.The set
classes characteristicof the 4-14 complex display a logical
and incrementalexpansionof intervalcontent, but they form
a less cohesive grouping.Most notably,the set classesassoci-
ated in terms of their intervallic properties do not form a
mutually inclusive group due to the lack of inclusion be-
tween the hexachordaland septachordalmembers.
The choice of characteristicdiatonic set classeswould ini-
tially appearto be unproblematic,with set classes allied to
the 7-35 cynosurevia the diatonic cycle. Such a theoretically
pure view of the diatonic orbit of set classes in the present
context is quickly refuted,however,by those sonorities that
characterizethe processof diatonic"crystallization" delineat-
ing important structural junctures in the music. At such
junctures, there is a marked tendency toward sonorities asso-
ciated with the gapped or secondarydiatonic cycle, notably
in the collection 8-22 (referagain to Example 6[c]) and the
cadential polychord 6-33 (Example 5). The theoretical ex-
planation for such an inclination is to be found in the mar-
46
ginally closer associationbetween set classes characteristicof
the 4-14 complex and those of the gapped diatonic cycle, a
relationshipmost clearlyillustratedby a comparisonof their
respectiveintervalvectors.Example24 highlights the greater
similarity between the vectors of "4-14 characteristic"set
8-17 546652 1-2-1-1-1-2-1-3
7-21 424641 1-1-2-1-3-1-3
6-z19 313431 1-2-1-3-1-4
5-21 202420 1-3-1-3-4
4-17 102210 3-1-3-5
3-3 101100 1-3-8
EXAMPLE 22. Characteristicsetsfor genus 3-3/4-17.
classes of cardinalities 4 and 5 (and their complements)
compared to those of the correspondinggapped diatonic-
cycle set classes.The associationis reflectedin Forte'sorigi-
nal measuresof similarity.46
The final choice of set classes characterizingthe complex
genus 4-14/7-35 reflectsboth an inclination toward a more
diffuse definition of diatonicism,and a focusing of the genus
aroundprimaryset classes.In other words, for a set class to
be deemed truly characteristicof the genus, it must be a
member of the inner orbits of set classes representingboth
the 4-14 and the 7-35 side of the genus. According to this
criterion,a numberof set classes previouslydeemed charac-
teristicof the 4-14 cynosurefall awayby virtue of their chro-
matic status, leaving the arrayof characteristicset classes
shown in Example25.
Once again, the final group of set classes reflectsa degree
of divergence between those most clearly representativeof
the theoreticalcenter of the genus and those given a central
role in the music.That the two orbitsof set classesassociated
See Forte 1973, 46-60. The expression R2 indicates "maximum similar-
ity with respect to interval class." Only R1, indicating an additional in-
terchange feature between the two remaining vector entries, signifies
greater similarity.The expression Rp "maximum similarity with respect
to pitch class," common to all entries in Example 24, is indicative of a
commonly held subset (n-l).
272 MUSIC THEORY SPECTRUM 25 (2003)

Characteristicsets (complex4-14) Characteristicsets (complex7-35)

sc iv sia sc iv sia
9-4 766773 1-1-1-1-1-2-1-1-3 9-9 676683 1-1-1-2-1-1-1-2-2
8-14 555562 1-1-2-1-1-1-2-3 8-23 465472 1-1-1-2-2-1-2-2
7-27 344451 1-1-2-1-2-2-3 7-35 254361 1-2-2-1-2-2-2
6-z46 233331 1-1-2-2-3-3 6-32 143250 2-2-1-2-2-3
5-27 122230 1-2-2-3-4 5-35 032140 2-2-3-2-3
4-14 111120 2-1-4-5 4-23 021030 2-3-2-5
3-4 100110 1-4-7 3-9 010020 2-5-5

EXAMPLE 23. Characteristic 4-14 and 7-35.

setsforcomplexes

Set v e c t o r Similarity Set v e c t o r Similarity

3-7 0 1 1 0[ 0 Rp 5-23 1 3 2 1[ 0 R, Rp
3-4 1 0 01 1 X0 5-27 1 2 2 2 3 0
3-9 0 1[ 0 2 O Rp 5-35 0 3 2 1 4 0 Rp

4-22 0 2 1 1 2 0 R2,Rp 6-33 1 4 3 2 4 1 Rp

4-14 1 1 1 1 2 0 6-z46 23 3 3 3 1
4-23 0 2 1 0 3 0 Rp 6-32 1 4 3 2 5 0 Rp

EXAMPLE 24. Comparisonof interval vectors:genus4-14/7-35.

with the dual cynosuresoverlapto a farlesser extent than the
3-3/4-17 complexesinvoked above is apparentin the rather
less coherent grouping of characteristicset classes presented
here. Most noticeable is the lack of complement relations
between set classes, a result of the two spheres of influence
exerted by the cynosures.Perhapsunsurprisingly,the cyno-
sural tetrachordexerts greatest influence over set classes of
low cardinality as they are projected in the music, while
largerset classes achieve prominencethrough the process of
diatoniccrystallization,characteristicof the largercynosure.
In both cases, the process of refinementthat determined
the most effective model of the harmonic duality initially
observed by Persichetti highlights particularcharacteristics
of that duality.The less clearlyfocused group of characteris-
tic set classes at the heart of genus 4-14/7-35, for example,
would appear to confirm the ultimate ascendancy of the
chromatictetrachord4-17 (Schuman's"own type of tonic")
and its more coherentassociatedgenus 3-3/4-17.
The constructionof such bespoke genera allows the ana-
lyst to follow up initial impressionsregardingthe structure
 BESPOKE PITCH-CLASS SET GENERA IN WILLIAM SCHUMAN'S SIXTH SYMPHONY 273

sc iv sia isticallydissimilaras Schumanand Debussy,while the music

of Berg or Schoenberg may indeed be best modeled from
9-9 676683 1-1-1-2-1-1-1-2-2 Forte'sperspective.47More prosaically,it may be that music
8-22 465562 1-1-1-2-1-2-2-2 deployinglargecollections as structuraldeterminantsis more
7-35 254361 1-2-2-1-2-2-2 effectively considered in terms of genera emanating from
6-33 143241 2-1-2-2-2-3 cynosures of high cardinality,embracing large numbers of
5-27 122230 1-2-2-3-4 smallerset classes under the umbrellaof a single collection.
4-14 111120 2-1-4-5 (The contrastbetween Forte'sKh-based system and Parks's
3-4 100110 1-4-7 one-to-one sub-/supersetrequirementis also a consideration
here.) Ultimately,it is only through active engagementwith
EXAMPLE 25. Characteristicsetsfor genus 4-14/7-35. theories of genera, embracinga diverse repertory,that such
questionswill be answered.

and internal dynamics of a particularwork, accounting for REFERENCES

the presence or absence of pitch-class-set formations and
deriving a clearerunderstandingof relationsbetween them.
While comparativeanalyticalliteratureis sparse, it is per-
haps worth consideringsome of the implicationsfor further
researchof the findingspresentedhere and elsewhere.Clearly,
certain repertoiresare more amenable to analysis in these
terms than others. Schuman'sapproachis so obviouslybased
upon the consistent deploymentof particulartypes of sonor-
ity (a legacy of his studies with Roy Harris) that further
analysisin terms of pitch-class set-class genera proved irre-
sistible. As RichardParkshas noted, however,not all reper-
toires are as responsiveto examinationin these terms. Simi-
larly, broad distinctions drawn between Forte-style and
Parks-style models may be borne out by further studies.
Forte'sa priori model, for example,may prove to be most ef-
fective in highlighting differencesand shifts between works
and acrossrepertories;it is alwayspossible to producea com-
parativegeneric fingerprintof a work in these terms. Parks-
style models, on the other hand, may proveto be more infor-
mative with regard to the internal dynamics of particular
works, as demonstratedhere. Similarly,the flexibilityinher-
47 Paradoxically,
ent in Parks'sapproachmay be adept at tracing those intu-
itive, or instinctive, associations between pitch constructs
that characterizethe musical language of composersas styl-
Agawu, Kofi. 1989. "Stravinsky'sMass and Stravinsky
Analysis."MusicTheorySpectrum11: 139-63.
Antokoletz, Elliott. 1984. The Music of Be/a Bartdk:A Study
of Tonalityand Progressionin Twentieth-CenturyMusic.
Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress.
Ayrey, Craig. 1998a. "Berg's'Warm die Luifte'and PC Set
Genera:A PreliminaryReading."MusicAnalysis17: 163-
76.
. 1998b: Round Table: Response and Discussion
(CambridgeUniversityMusic Analysis Conference 1997;
responseby Forte, discussion by Ayrey,Parks,Doerksen,
Dunsby,Kennett,Gates, Russ).MusicAnalysis17: 227-36.
Clark,John, W. 1982. "The One-Movement Symphony in
America, 1937-1976: With Analyses of Works by Roy
Harris,William Schuman,Vincent Persichetti and Peter
Fricker."Ph.D. dissertation: University of California,
Santa Barbara.
by Parksin at-
however,the difficultiesencountered
tempting to model the music of these composers (see note 14) were less
apparent in the case of Webern. He goes on to observe that "Webern is
a little easier [to model in this way] at least the Webern I've looked at."