Polytonality
Adam
studio two, I decided to play around a bit, and combined one of Mrs.
Mills's own recordings with pitch-altered versions of itself
(bitonality) and got some interesting results. BTW I picked a song that
had actually been performed by both Mrs. Mills /and/ by the Beatles.
So my question is: Did the Beatles use polytonality in any of their
songs? (Besides "Revolution 9", obviously.)
Adam
--
All follow-ups are directed to the newsgroup rec.music.beatles.moderated.
If your follow-up more properly belongs in the unmoderated newsgroup, please
change your headers appropriately. -- the moderators
--
LookingGlass
>
> So my question is: Did the Beatles use polytonality in any of their
> songs? (Besides "Revolution 9", obviously.)
>
> Adam
Stravinsky used a bit of "bitonality"...think PETRUSHKA.
The closest I think The Beatles came to it is the two different takes
of STRAWBERRY FIELDS FOREVER...in which Sir George had to speed up one
take, and slow down another to *marry* the two takes together...to get
the masterpiece we know today. ;^)
LookingGlass
>
> songs? (Besides "Revolution 9", obviously.)
>
> Adam
I should explain that *bi-tonality* means that a piece of music is
written/played in two different keys. *Poly-tonality* would indicate
many keys. I don't think your example of *pitch-shifting* or the SSF
example I gave is either of those two...though the Stravinsky example
IS an example of *bi-tonality. Famously so!
I don't believe The Beatles did anything like this, though they
certainly *pitch-shifted* many of their recordings...RAIN for example.
paramucho
<snip>
>So my question is: Did the Beatles use polytonality in any of their
>songs? (Besides "Revolution 9", obviously.)
1967/1968 is definitely the place to look. Off the top of my head:
The piano part in the instrumental break of "Only A Northern Song"
seems to me to go off on it's own tangent. IIRC it plays ascending
thirds in C major against the background of the song's A major.
The first "Yer Blues" solo, again Lennon I think, ends with an
upper-fretboard chordal passage which has little relationship with the
song's key.
Nothing seems to have surfaced of the improvisatory sessions of
1967/1968. From the fleeting descriptions available one could imagine
that some of this material may have been free form improvisation,
however, for all his many strengths, Lewisohn is not an ideal reporter
of purely musical information. I haven't read the "Engineering The
Beatles" book (or whatever it's called) and I still haven't studied
the Emerick book properly; they may have more detail.
I seem to recall some of the music for Jesse's dream sequence merging
different keys, but this could have just been the standard cinematic
practice of morphing from one scene to another. I'd need to examine
the jangling sounds heard while Lennon, playing a waiter with a
mustache, shovels spaghetti on to Aunt Jesse's plate.
The first mix of "What's The New Mary Jane" needs more analysis, but I
think there are polytonal passages involved. The later mixes simply
graffiti new material on top without regard to any musical scheme and
belong in a different category. One suspects that the piece recorded
for the light show in early 1967 probably falls into the same
category.
None of the pieces thus far mentioned employ a systematic bitonality
(a concept which some think is a contradiction in terms). The
coordination in "Revolution 9", however, does rise beyond mere
circumstances of chance. Even though the samples used in "Revolution
9" come from many different keys, we can often sense relationships
between the keys because of a certain amout of aural color
coordination, and, because there are so many instances that one is
tempted to think of the piece as "pantonal". Think of it this way: if
the Beatles were going to indulge in polytonality then something like
"Revolution 9" was probably going to be the result.
Lennon's home-recorded Mellotron coda in the full eight minute version
of Lennon's "Flying" also comes close to an extended bitonal
environment where the upper and lower mellotron parts seem to live in
only partially related keys. That "partial relationship", is, however
tonal.
Beyond all these "French For Bullshit" examples there's the broader
point to be made about the correlation between plain rock 'n' roll and
the conventional model of well-behaved classical period tonality: Rock
is often "polymodal" in the sense that pieces might mix blues-style
melodies, with flat thirds, sevenths etc, with major mode
accompaniments. There are other ways in which rock challenges the
standard model in terms of dominant paradigms, key centers etc.
Ian
LookingGlass
>
> Think of it this way: if
> the Beatles were going to indulge in polytonality then something like
> "Revolution 9" was probably going to be the result.
I consider all these to be random (accidental) examples of
"polytonality"...that is, not actually written in the music...as in
REVOLUTION 9 or TOMORROW NEVER KNOWS. Just effects. As *recordings* I
guess they can be considered examples.
It was McCartney (and later Lennon) who was initially exposed to the
likes of Cage, Stockhausen, Berio and others...all experimenting with
the *outer edges* of music. Lots of "musique concrete" and tape loops
and sound montage sorts of creations. But I believe most of it was
*chance* rather than deliberately written "bi-tonal" or "poly-tonal"
or "pan-tonal". You mention IT'S ONLY A NORTHERN SONG. That one is a
good example of deliberately implying poly-tonality...in the
lyric...but the realization of that implied poly-tonality is arrived
at by *chance* in the layered sounds and guitar effects used.
When I think of bi-tonality or poly-tonality, I think of music
*deliberately* written in two, three, four, or more keys. IMO
paramucho
<goldenc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 11, 9:56 am, paramu...@hotmail.com (paramucho) wrote:
>>
>> Think of it this way: if
>> the Beatles were going to indulge in polytonality then something like
>> "Revolution 9" was probably going to be the result.
>
>
>I consider all these to be random (accidental) examples of
>"polytonality"...that is, not actually written in the music...as in
>REVOLUTION 9 or TOMORROW NEVER KNOWS. Just effects. As *recordings* I
>guess they can be considered examples.
The On-line Grove definition treats polytonality as an extension of
bitonality, which it defines as: "The simultaneous, superimposed
presence of two distinct tonalities".
Grove accepts the bitonal "effect": "Techniques loosely categorized as
bitonal are often passing effects within a harmonic language that is
subtly balanced between traditional hierarchies and new symmetries."
The Ives and Mozart pieces cited in the Wikipedia polytonality article
would appear to be trying to emulate "accidental" polytonality, so I
don't have a problem with "real" accidental constellations.
I don't think the distinction between "written" or "recorded"
polytonality is decisive. The Beatles lived in an environment where
the recording served as the document, and they "edited" a recording in
pretty much the same way a written document would be edited.
"Revolution 9" is a completely edited document.
That said, I made a related distinction when I wrote:
None of the pieces thus far mentioned employ a systematic bitonality
(a concept which some think is a contradiction in terms).
However, I singled out "Revolution 9" and "Flying" as being more than
just improvised. The technique used in "Revolution 9" is only partly
random, indeed, for the most part the coordination between the main
samples is highly controlled, and the samples themselves were chosen
with care. Thus I consider the piece to be more than just the sum of
"random" "effects".
Beyond all that, rock does not need to be measured in terms of any
other musical style. Polytonality to *rock* is probably best defined
as any departure from the standard rock tonal paradigm which can be
explained in polytonal terms. Under this definition the other examples
I cited also make it into the arena.
Ian
LookingGlass
>
> songs? (Besides "Revolution 9", obviously.)
Silly me!
The most significent example of polytonality in the songs of the
Beatles...DELIBERATELY written into the music is of course...A DAY IN
THE LIFE. I'm not sure Sir George scored in different keys, but the
instruments certainly hit all (or most) of the notes in the chromatic
scales...creating a *polytonality* in that orchestral orgasm.
BlackMonk
"LookingGlass" <goldenc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:578831c5-d191-4785...@a5g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 10, 4:49 pm, Adam <a...@address.invalid> wrote:
>
> So my question is: Did the Beatles use polytonality in any of their
> songs? (Besides "Revolution 9", obviously.)
< The most significent example of polytonality in the songs of the
Beatles...DELIBERATELY written into the music is of course...A DAY IN
THE LIFE. I'm not sure Sir George scored in different keys, but the
instruments certainly hit all (or most) of the notes in the chromatic
scales...creating a *polytonality* in that orchestral orgasm. >
Wouldn't that be better described as "atonality?"
LookingGlass
>
> Wouldn't that be better described as "atonality?"
I would not argue with that designation. It certainly fits the bill.
Bi-tonality...two keys.
Poly-tonality...many or multiple keys.
A-tonality...without a key.
All three produce a *dissonant* sound.
"If you're listening to this song
You may think the chords are going wrong..."
paramucho
<Blac...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
>"LookingGlass" <goldenc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:578831c5-d191-4785...@a5g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>On Jun 10, 4:49 pm, Adam <a...@address.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> So my question is: Did the Beatles use polytonality in any of their
>> songs? (Besides "Revolution 9", obviously.)
>
>< The most significent example of polytonality in the songs of the
>Beatles...DELIBERATELY written into the music is of course...A DAY IN
>THE LIFE. I'm not sure Sir George scored in different keys, but the
>instruments certainly hit all (or most) of the notes in the chromatic
>scales...creating a *polytonality* in that orchestral orgasm. >
>
>Wouldn't that be better described as "atonality?"
"Polytonality" requires the presence of more than one tonal center,
i.e. two distinct keys being active at the same time. I think you're
right insofar that we can't discern two or more keys being active.
The reconstructed score in Walt Everett's THE BEATLES AS MUSICIANS
shows Martin doing more-or-less what Lennon prescribed: having the
instruments go from their lowest note to their highest note. The one
difference is that George Martin has all the instruments start and
stop on a note of the E major chord and I think we hear all the
chromatic activity as taking place within an E major environment. If
we didn't then the conclusion of the chord wouldn't have the sense of
finality that it has. I think it's all driven by the repeated E that
ends Lennon's verse, starts Macca's bridge and forms the basis of that
huge closing chord.
"Atonality" requires the absence of a tonal center, so I don't think
the passage is "atonal" either, just massively dissonant about an E
pedal.
There's a virtuoso demonstration of the ADITL climax, in a tonal
context, at the end of Nina Simone's "Revolution" clone (along with
assorted Beatle riffs): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16a3BX-uV4k
Ian