Why Atonality Is A Myth.

Music, as an art form, has evolved over centuries, with countless compositions spanning various genres, styles, and techniques. In more recent music history, some music theorists have begun believing that music can be devoid of tonal center or traditional harmonic structure. However, a closer examination reveals that the idea of true atonality is a myth, and music inherently possesses tonal qualities that are deeply rooted in our perception of sound and the way we hear music. This article is the condensed version of my argument in why atonality is a myth. The fuller argument is published in my book "Implied Tonality: Why Atonality is a Myth".

Argument I: Explicit Consonance and Dissonance

The distance between two pitches is known as an interval. Intervals fall into two categories of sound, those being consonant and dissonant. Consonance refers to intervals that sound stable and are therefore "pleasing to the ear", while dissonance describes intervals that sound tense and unstable. The presence of consonances and dissonances implies an inherent tonal structure within music, as if there was no tension or dissonance there would be pitch equality which is a principal argument of atonality. That is to say that atonality argues and attempts to eliminate an aural and tonal hierarchy.

Argument II: Scales and Chords

The use of scales and chords is fundamental to music composition. Various scales, such as major, minor, as well as the 7 church modes, provide the foundation for melody and harmony. Chords, including major, minor, augmented, and diminished triads, each have a specific function about the key or to a given tonic note. To a piece to be atonal this harmonic relationship must be eliminated, however this is not possible. As naturally certain intervallic and harmonic relationships (and progressions or regressions) will appear. These tonal constructs demonstrate that music is always built upon a structured system, even when the composer is attempting to disregard these relationships or to intentionally disrupt them, their existence and presence is still there, disproving atonality.

Argument III: The Mathematics/Physics of Sound and Harmony

The physical properties of sound, as described by the overtone series, reveal that musical tones are not isolated entities but rather interrelated frequencies. These relationships create harmonic resonances and tonal hierarchies that are inherently tonal in nature. Furthermore, historical treatises by theorists like Zarlino, Fux, and Vicentino emphasize the importance of proportional relationships between intervals, reinforcing the concept of tonality. This becomes important as because tones, and chords inherently poses relationships relative to each other, it is not possible to eliminate these as they exist at a fundamental level, as can be illustrated by the overtone series.

Argument IV: Tonal Relationships and Their Implied Resolutions

In tonal music, specific harmonic progressions and relationships create a sense of tension and release (consonance and dissonance). The dominant-tonic relationship (V(7)-I) exemplifies this, with the leading tone pulling towards resolution. The presence of such relationships in music implies tonality, as dissonances seek consonant resolutions. Ultimately if there is dissonance there must be a consonance and therefore as some notes are not functionally independent of one another pure atonality is not possible.

Argument V: Chord Progressions

The prevalence of classic diatonic progressions, like ii-V (7)-I and I-IV-V, demonstrates that music often relies on tonal frameworks. Advanced progressions, such as augmented sixth chords and modal interchange, also maintain tonal connections within compositions. Ultimately in composition chord progressions will inevitably arise, and therefore because our ears are able to recognize these patterns and therefore complete them and hear certain chords/pitches as more "important" than another, it is evident that not all pitches are equal which is contrary to the aims of atonality. Even in fleeting moments of major/minor shifts, the tonal center remains a vital element.

Argument VI: Atonality

Atonality attempts to break free from the traditional tonal system, treating each individual note equally and rejecting the notion of consonance and dissonance. However, this argument is logically inconsistent, as it often uses tonal language to describe its rejection of the tonal system. It cannot fully escape the tonal context it seeks to eliminate.

Argument VII: Functional/Implied Harmony

Implied harmony in music, such as the suggestion of an ii-V (7)-I progression or modulation, reinforces the concept of tonality. Atonal compositions struggle to establish a clear tonal center or functional harmony, often relying on structural elements that ultimately imply tonality.

Argument VIII: Why Atonality Fails

Atonality falls short in explaining the resulting dissonance in music. Dissonance in atonal compositions still implies a resolution, highlighting the enduring presence of tonality. It dismisses the aural hierarchy that tonal music relies on, obscuring the musical narrative.

Conclusion

While atonality may be an intriguing and avant-garde concept in music, the arguments presented here assert that genuine atonality does not exist. Music, in its essence, possesses tonal qualities deeply rooted in the human perception of sound and harmony. Consonance, dissonance, scales, chords, and tonal relationships all contribute to this fact. Atonality, in its quest to break free from tradition, ultimately relies on tonal elements for its own definition, solidifying the notion that music is inherently tonal and that atonality is a myth.