A Genealogic-Structural Hypotesis of Harmonic Dualism

Генеалогико-структурная гипотеза гармонического дуализма
Abstract

In “classical” music theory, the minor triad has always been considered subordinate to the prevailing, and more “natural”, major triad (both for major and minor tonalities). 
Harmonic dualism is a principle that ascribes equal importance to the major and minor triads approached from dialectical and acoustical point of view, i.e. in terms of undertones and overtones, mediation of contrasting forces and physiological-structural understanding (following Oettingen’s (1866), Hauptmann’s (1853), and Riemann’s (1905 and 1915) studies). However, these studies do not seem to convincingly justify the existence of the minor triad; all attempts to trace the foundation of the minor triads in Oettingen’s series of undertones appears equally weak. Being the minor triad — and tonality — an indisputable piece of evidence, the David Lewin’s A Formal Theory of Generalized Tonal Functions (1982) is the only one able to demonstrate the structural-formal explanation of harmonic dualism in terms of inversion of the same intervals which belong to the major triad.
Considering that the tonal praxis is likely to come from transposition of psalm-tones in the instrumental music of the XVII century (following Barnett’s (1998), and Powers’s (2014) papers), we seek the ontological basis of harmonic dualism in the praxis of temperaments; depending on the higher or lower consonance of the two triads in meantone temperaments (for simplicity 1/3 and 1/4 of syntonic comma (s.c.) meantone temperaments), we can trace back a double dualism, in which the third in question is ontologically prevalent, and the complementary one is its dual. However, temperaments do not allow modulations without a transposition to distant keys. Conversely, Lewin’s model allows generating “dual” triads by mathematical manipulation of their constituents — i.e., inversion (“TDINV” operation) and/or conjugation (“CONJ” operation). By looking at the modal diatonic sets on which psalmodic-tones are based (the natural notes with added B ) and by arranging the pitches of these tones as thirds, one can obtain two palindromes which represent all the triadic possibilities for these modal sets, which confirms the structure theorized by Lewin (which is a palindrome as well).
Our approach contradicts the theories of “classical” harmonic dualism, which focuses only on the single constituents of the triads (regarding the topics cited above). Moreover, such approaches seek to identify how the model could be adapted to the temperament independently, i. e. without including the temperament itself into the model. All these aspects fail to provide a convincing explanation of the harmonic dualism, that wasn’t achieved until Lewin’s formulation. By considering chords as autonomous entities, different from the ordinary superposition of scalar intervals, Lewin provided for the first time a formally convincing explanation based on the equal temperament, i.e. without making comparable consonance and “naturalness” of the major and minor triad a consequence of a specific intonation (following Lewin’s 1982 paper). 
My paper aims at highlighting the relevance of a historically informed genealogy of the harmonic dualism, in relation with the musical practices that led to the emergence of tonality through the use of temperaments and their interval structure.

References
  1. Abbado, Michelangelo. 1964. “Sull’esistenza dei suoni armonici inferiori.” Acta Musicologica 36, no. 4 (October–December): 234–37.
  2. Barnett, Gregory. 1998. “Modal Theory, Church Keys, and the Sonata at the End of Seventeenth Century.” Journal of the American Musicological Society 51, no. 2 (Summer): 245–81.
  3. Barnett, Gregory. 2008. “Tonal Organization in Seventeenth-Century Music Theory.” In The Cambridge History of Western Music Theory, edited by Thomas J. Christensen, 407–55. Cambridge Histories Online: Cambridge University Press.
  4. Dahlhaus, Carl. 1957. “War Zarlino Dualist?”. Die Musikforshung 10, no. 2: 286–90.
  5. Dahlhaus, Carl. 1990. Studies on the Origin of Harmonic Tonality. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  6. Dai Prà, Gianluca. 2020. “‘Come una formica’: il ruolo dei temperamenti nella possibile genesi del dualismo armonico.” Rivista di Analisi e Teoria Musicale 2020/1: 53–88.
  7. Dai Prà, Gianluca. 2021. “Kyle Gann, The arithmetic of Listening. Tuning Theory & History for the Impractical Musicians, […],” book review. Rivista di Analisi e Teoria Musicale, 2021/2: 163–68.
  8. Duffin, Ross W. 2007. How Equal Temperament Rouined Harmony (and Why You Should Care). Kindle edition. New York: W.W. Norton.
  9. Gann, Kyle. 2019. The Arithmetic of Listening. Tuning Theory & History for the Impractical Musicians. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
  10. Grande, Antonio. 2020. Una rete di ascolti. Viaggio nell’universo musicale neo-riemanniano. Roma: Aracne.
  11. Hyer, Brian. 2008. “Tonality.” In The Cambridge History of Western Music Theory, edited by Thomas J. Christensen, 726–52. Cambridge Histories Online: Cambridge University Press.
  12. Isacof, Stuart. 2005. Temperamento. Storia di un enigma musicale. Torino: EDT.
  13. Kopp, David. 2006. Chromatic Transformations in Nineteenth-Century Music. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  14. Klumpenhouwer, Henry. 2008. “Dualist Tonal Space and Transformations in Nineteenth-Century Musical Thought.” In The Cambridge History of Western Music Theory, edited by Thomas J. Christensen, 456–76. Cambridge Histories Online: Cambridge University Press.
  15. Klumpenhouwer, Henry. 2011. “Harmonic Dualism as Historical and Structural Imperative.” In The Oxford Handbook of Neo-Riemannian Music Theories, edited by Edward Gollin, and Alexander Rehding, 194–217. New York: Oxford University Press.
  16. Lewin, David. 1982. “A Formal Theory of Generalized Tonal Functions.” Journal of Music Theory 26, no. 1 (Spring): 23–60.
  17. Lewin, David. 1984. “Amfortas’s Prayer to Titurel and the role of D in ‘Parsifal’: The Tonal Spaces of the Drama and the Enharmonic C /B”. 19th-Century Music 7, no. 3 (April): 336–94.
  18. Lewin, David. 2011. Generalized Music Intervals and Transformations. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  19. Powers, Harold, and Frans Wierin. 2001. “Modal Theories and Polyphonic Music.” In The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, AA.VV. S.l., s.d. Digital edition.
  20. Powers, Harold S. 2014. “From Psalmody to Tonality.” In Tonal Structure in Early Music, edited by Cristle Collins Judd, positions 5502–6402. Kindle edition. New York: Routlage.
  21. Powers, Harold S. 1981. “Tonal Types and Modal Categories in Renaissance Polyphony.” Journal of the American Musicological Society 34, no. 3 (Autumn): 428–70.
  22. Rehding, Alexander. 2003. Hugo Riemann and the Birth of Modern Musical Thought. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  23. Riemann, Hugo. 2011/1882. “Die Natur der Harmonik.” In Benjamin Steege. “‘The Nature of Harmony’: A Translation and Commentary,” in The Oxford Handbook of Neo-Riemannian Music Theories, edited by Edward Gollin, and Alexander Rehding, 65–91. New York: Oxford University Press.
  24. Riemann, Hugo. Harmony Simplified or The Theory of the Tonal Functions of Chords. London: Augener LTD, 1895.
  25. Riemann, Hugo. 2011/1905. “Das Problem des harmonishen Dualismus.” In Ian Bent. “The Problem of Harmonic Dualism: A Translation and Commentary,” in The Oxford Handbook of Neo-Riemannian Music Theories, edited by Edward Gollin, and Alexander Rehding, 170–93. New York: Oxford University Press.
  26. Riemann, Hugo. 1992/1915. “Ideen zu Einer ‘Lehre von den Tonvorstellungen’.” In Robert W. Wason, Elisabeth West Marvin. “Riemann’s ‘Ideen zu Einer ‘Lehre von den Tonvorstellungen’: An Annotated Translation.” Journal of Music Theory 36, no. 1 (Spring): 69–117.
  27. Timoczko, Dimitri. 2011. A Geometry of Music. Harmony and Counterpoint in the Extended Common Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.
  28. Timoczko, Dimitri. 2011. “Dualism and the Beholder’s Eye: Inversional Symmetry in Chromatic Tonal Music.” In The Oxford Handbook of Neo-Riemannian Music Theories, edited by Edward Gollin, and Alexander Rehding, 246–67. New York: Oxford University Press.