Tchaikovsky's tone

[Amy Reusch]

In my insophisticated way, I was wondering about Tchaikovsky's tonality today, because Allegro Brilliante's music has been stuck in my head and I keep catching myself trying to hum it and getting lost... and started wondering if it might have been influenced by the Russian microtonal style carrilons which I've never heard but have been wondering about ever since reading that recent New Yorker article about the Harvard carrilon... there's this sort of deep orchestral resonance in Tchaikovsky's music that makes me wonder if microtonal harmonies are happening within the structure that weren't typical of more western composers.

Would someone with some music theory behind them please tell me to stop letting my mind wander off on it's own in the dark, or is there actually some plausible commonality?

With all due respect, I've did a light check of the über-brain (the internet) without much success... .

Did find this silliness: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowell_House regarding the 1812 overture and carillon:

During the latter, those not part of the official orchestral ensemble are encouraged to contribute on kazoos; in lieu of cannon, hydrogen-filled balloons are ignited by the House chemistry tutor; and until recently (see below) the performance would climax with the role originally scored by Tchaikovsky for authentic Muscovite carillon, being played (appropriately enough) by Lowell's authentic Muscovite carillon.

[papeetepatrick]

That's very interesting, although my guess is not 'harmonies', because it's still the same scale. I just tried to find the NY'er article, you can't read all of it without subscribing. If there's a paragraph or so that describes specifically what you mean by microtonal, I'd appreciate your putting an excerpt, in the meantime may do some googling. I believe we were talking about some microtonal pieces about 8 or so months ago, but more along the lines of scales with 19 tones, I think that was one, then I brought up something about the Indian 'srutis' and the microtones in Harry Partch's music for which he built special instruments. I wonder, before doing any research myself, whether you might be talking about certain harmonies that give exotic impressiona of something perhaps a little oriental a la russe, etc., more than actual microtones, though. Tchaikovsky is pretty traditionally tonal, even though he's a genius, of course, and found his unique expression harmonically and as a great melodist. Microtones per se are not even to be found in 12-tone music, which still uses the same pitches, but under different rules and regulations. You're probably talking about some kind of exoticism you hear in the chords and progressions, but I don't think that would mean microtones, at least I'm having a heard time 'envisioning' it.

Anthonynyc, mel, and others may know more about this than I do, though.

I am going to look up something about the carillons though.

[papeetepatrick]

Here's a little article I just found online about the Harvard Russian Carillon, but not much detail beyond mentioning the Eastern scale of harmonies. This is interesting, though.

Music Professor Rings Lowell House Bells Since Imported Russian Ringer Drank Ink in Stillman

Set of «Zvons» Incomplete After One Off-Key Bell Was Exiled To Business School

The 26 tons of metal that make up the bells of Lowell House will not ring out next Sunday morning to shatter the exam period silence, guaranteed Arthur T. Merritt, associate professor of Music and present incumbent of the office of bell-ringer, yesterday.

Tuned to an Eastern scale of harmonies which require a certain amount of experience, appreciation, and patience before it can be fully appreciated, the bells now ring at about one month intervals, the concerts coming on the day of rest and effectively warning residents of the Houses that dinner time has arrived.

13 Tons to 22 Pounds

There are 16 bells, ranging from a metal monster of 13 tons to a woo rascal mere pounds. There should be 17 to fill up the set in the true Russian manner, but the fourth from the largest was found before their installation to be in a different key from the others, or a one inhabitant of the House put it, «even more out of key than the others,» and so it was sent across the river to the Business School, where it now rings for the end of classes.

The bells are a true Russian Zvon, or carillon, and once were the pride and joy of the Dansilovsky, or Danailov Monastery, in Moscow, and they were given to the University by Charles R. Crane, former United States Minister to China.

Crane Fond of Russia

Crane, who rose to fame as the nation’s leading manufacturing of plumbing, traveled widely through Europe after the War and was struck by the charm of the Russian bells. On his return to this country he offered a set to President Lowell who, grateful for a chance to add a little English atmosphere to the Cambridge scene through the means of a bit of change-ringing, accepted.

Through the efforts of Thomas Whittemore, keeper of Byzantine Coins and Seals in Fogg Museum and Fellow for Research in Byzantine Art, Crane was able to obtain the bells, after assuring the Soviet government, which was unwilling to let the carillon out of the country if it was to be used for religious purposes, that Harvard was not a religious institution.

Russian Bell Ringer

With the bells came a Russian bell-ringer, one Saradjeff, who was commissioned to direct installation of the Zvon and then to teach their playing.

Now Zvon-playing is more an art than a science, and the true Zvon-player learns the trade from his father, who learned it from his, who learned it form his. Saradjeff was the son of a father and mother both of whom played the bells, and when he came to this country, he had already composed 132 symphonies for the Russian carillon. It was said that he could recognize any of the 4000 bells in Moscow by its tone.

Tendency to Fits

Besides a lack of anything like an elementary knowledge of English, he had a tendency toward fits. He got the bells safely up in their tower in the fall of 1930 and had a fit soon after.

When installed in Stillman he thought, quite naturally, that he was being poisoned, as he was a Russian and used to better things. And one morning when the doctors found him drinking a bottle of ink as a remedy, it wad decided that he had best return to the land of caviar.

With Saradjeff gone there was the problem of finding someone to play the bells. For a while tow professors from Columbia and Smith alternated on successive Sundays (in those days the bells were played every week, if not more often). Mason Hammond '25, associate professor of Classics and History, and at that time head tutor of Lowell House, who had acquired a penchant for playing the bells, performed between times when occasions arose on which it was deemed fitting for the bells to be rung.

Source: The Harvard Crimson Online

[Mel Johnson]

Anyway, back to the "Allegro Brilliante" score. It's pretty straightforward Eb major tonality. Mussorgsky's Boris Godunov has passages of microtonal carillon effects, ditto the Kastchei's Castle scene of "Firebird".

[Amy Reusch]

Probably my difficulties with Allegro Brilliante have more to do with my relative tone deafness or scale ignorance than anything else... ... and I'm racing at the moment, but when I find a quiet moment, I'll dig out the NYer article. The gist of it that I remember (and untrustworthy memory at that) was that the bell ringer who appeared to be a kook was actually something of a rare genius... and that they now believe that he could as he claimed hear a 1000 microtones. (between pitches? between whole tones? out of my league here ).. that the russian bells were all slightly different and pitched individually. He claimed there were some missing links in the Lowell carillon even though there was no evidence that any of the originals had been lost. I was thinking that if ...well... if there were subtle slight microtonal differences in tones played together, whether that wouldn't make for a fuller tone, sort of like a stringed instrument's vibrato, and whether with the carrilon deep in Tchaikovsky's sense of what he liked in music, whether he would have used instrumentation that would have mimicked this. (now what on earth I was thinking might happen with a piano, is just typical of my fuzzy thinking...).

Still, different composers seem to have affinitis for different tonalities... I was just wondering what makes them tick.... there are only so many notes on the scale, and yet Tchaikovsky is so different from say Bach... it's more than just rhythmic motifs, isn't it?

Will find the NYer article... it's interesting regardless of my rambling.

[papeetepatrick]

he claimed hear a 1000 microtones. (between pitches? between whole tones? out of my league here )..

Yes, between the ordinary 12 tones, which proceed in half-tones. Between a whole tone is one of these pitches, making three within any single whole tone. 1000 microtone would be between a half- or semi-tone, so that would be the reference point, although you'd just double that for a whole tone, which is like C to D, a semitone is E to F (no 'black keys' in between, as it were.) Well, we can all 'sense 1000 microtones', I guess, very vaguely, this is probably a sort of idiot savant who can actually hear specifically 1000 pitches between two pitches of the chromatic scale. As I had mentioned when talking about Partch, these microtones that he could hear (many more than the usual Western scales, but certainly not anything like our carilloneur), often just sound to us as though the instruments are 'out of tune', because we are used to the diatonic scales and traditional tuning.

I was thinking that if ...well... if there were subtle slight microtonal differences in tones played together, whether that wouldn't make for a fuller tone, sort of like a stringed instrument's vibrato, and whether with the carrilon deep in Tchaikovsky's sense of what he liked in music, whether he would have used instrumentation that would have mimicked this. (now what on earth I was thinking might happen with a piano, is just typical of my fuzzy thinking...).

Still, different composers seem to have affinitis for different tonalities... I was just wondering what makes them tick.... there are only so many notes on the scale, and yet Tchaikovsky is so different from say Bach... it's more than just rhythmic motifs, isn't it?

Oh yes, much more than rhythmic, it's not rigorour counterpoint for one thing, just brushing past that which is the case in fugues, but harmonically different also--but then the progressions undergo evolution even by the time of Haydn and Mozart, not to mention Beethoven; then Chopin and Schumann and Wagner and Debussy, on up to Schoenberg's discovery...but PITCHWISE it is the same. What you quoted about the 1812 Overture would probably mean that the carillon itself had the microtones, just because that's its nature, but it would be limited to the carillon itself for the microtonal effects. At least I think so, not 100% sure because Mel mentions microtonal carillon effects in Mussorgsky and Stravinsky, but were these written into the rest of the instrumentation, the other instruments that are the strings, brass, winds, etc., so I'm not sure whether he means that a carillon is also itself used in these scores.

You have to do tuning in such a way to get the carillon effect literally, because when instruments are out of tune, you really are hearing microtones. It is probably possible to get something that approaches microtonal effects in harmonic choices and progressions, with some dissonances that are unexpected within the style even if they are not literally microtones. That could be what you are hearing, but then there's a lot of brooding music in Tchaikovsky too, and the deep romanticism would necessarily attract him to things like the carillon. But it's still primarily cosmopolitan music, like Liszt is 'Hungarian', but not quite as 'folk-oriented' as Bartok, who is much later. But it would definitely have its own 'Russianness' to it, in the same way all that French influence at the imperial courts is unmistakable, but even though it has not been always synthesized into a new kind of esthetic that is more 'its own' outside the cosmopolitanism, it is still arranged differently, because it's not possible to duplicate another culture in an alien one--you can do it superficially, but no further. I'm thinking right now of an exhibition I saw at the Met, I think last year, of some of these imperial treasures, which look very French-volupte, but the emphasis is more on the opulence rather than the subtleties (just a basic parallel example.)

[Helene]

In a season preview article on Ballet Arizona, which will perform "Swan Lake", "The Nutcracker", and "The Sleeping Beauty" in the upcoming season, Richard Nilsen quotes and writes,

"What makes Tchaikovsky special is that it is more like conducting regular symphonic music," [conductor Timothy] Russell says. "He was such a wonderful colorist, as in the opening oboe solo from 'Swan Lake,' or the addition of the piano - not harp, but piano - in 'Sleeping Beauty.' Or the celesta in 'Nutcracker.' "

The music is advanced harmonically, too, with many striking bass lines and chords. It's common to think of Tchaikovsky as all melody, but he was an exceptional craftsman, working hard to make each effect special.

"He went to work every day, not just waiting for inspiration, but crafting the pieces with solid worksmanship," Russell says.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/a...s0823dance.html

[innopac]

This is interesting about how the tuning of the bells of the Orthodox Church differs from the tuning of the bells of western carillons.

Moreover, because Russians consider bells to be rhythm rather than melody instruments, precise melodic tuning is not so important (or even desirable) as it would be in bells made for a carillon, for example.

This is the main difference between Russian and European bells. European bells are precise, machine-tuned instruments, scientifically designed to fit into large carillons, which really are grand metallic pianos. Russian bells are cast for a tone, but not refined after they come forth from the mould.

and

The sound of a bell used in one of these installations needs to be as disciplined and correct as a soldier in formation. No note should "jump out" of the spectrum and result in disharmony. But because Russian bells are rhythm instruments (drums), a certain amount of disharmony is tolerable and, indeed, even interesting.

That's the main difference, right there— in the fact that Russian bells are played like drums, and European bells like pianos. A definite musical phrase flows from the peal of several Russian bells when they are rung in a particular way: the slowly tolling boom of the big bell is sprinkled by a quick clangor of the mid-sized ones, all according to a pattern, which repeats itself even as it evolves. But the line is not a melody line, except perhaps in a very rudimentary way.

and from a second article

European bells are designed to suppress certain harmonics, and to enhance others in a way that's generally fit for carillons— which are essentially giant pianos. Russian bells, on the other hand, are cast for specific tones— and they achieve them— but they are more like drums, not melody instruments. For this reason, a certain "funkiness" is valued. Actually, what is valued generally in Orthodoxy is the "personal voice" of a thing, rather than its conformity to abstract production standards. That's what a bishop whose church has European bells was getting at when we were talking with him recently—"They're good," he said, "but their tuning is a little too precise for the Orthodox tradition."

What does all this mean, in terms of practical acoustics? Russian bells are cast for a tone, and finished when cast and not machine-tuned on a lathe, like their Western counterparts. Each has a particular, distinctive voice. That's why it can be said that you never forget the bells of your village, no matter how long you're away.

It's the distinctive, personal voice that makes a Russian bell an Orthodox bell.

[Mel Johnson]

What you quoted about the 1812 Overture would probably mean that the carillon itself had the microtones, just because that's its nature, but it would be limited to the carillon itself for the microtonal effects. At least I think so, not 100% sure because Mel mentions microtonal carillon effects in Mussorgsky and Stravinsky, but were these written into the rest of the instrumentation, the other instruments that are the strings, brass, winds, etc., so I'm not sure whether he means that a carillon is also itself used in these scores.

Remember that in the original scoring for the 1812 Overture, the bells were the actual Kremlin bells. Those are nothing if not Orthodox bells. (As to the cannon, well, they're certainly nothing if not percussion!) In Mussorgsky and Stravinsky, they had to resort to the tubular bells of a standard orchestra for timbre, but have instructions to the percussionist to "prepare" the bells for performance, by muffling the tubes, or touching them with the fingers as they are struck in order to produce a harmonic, or other overtone effect.

[papeetepatrick]

Remember that in the original scoring for the 1812 Overture, the bells were the actual Kremlin bells. Those are nothing if not Orthodox bells. (As to the cannon, well, they're certainly nothing if not percussion!) In Mussorgsky and Stravinsky, they had to resort to the tubular bells of a standard orchestra for timbre, but have instructions to the percussionist to "prepare" the bells for performance, by muffling the tubes, or touching them with the fingers as they are struck in order to produce a harmonic, or other overtone effect.

That answers some of Amy's questions and then some, doesn't it? It's the bells themselves that definitely are used for microtonal harmonic effects, but the rest of the orchestration is traditional major and minor diatonic tonality, which therefore means the basic harmony is still the same as what Schumann, Liszt, and even to some degree Debussy (although you'll find some of the old modes there, even a trace of Locrian, I believe in one of the piano Etudes; but there are occasional uses of the Lydian mode in Beethoven as well, which you wouldn't expect).

Another kind of way of answering this is to take a Tchaikovsky score which doesn't use those bells, whether Kremlin or otherwise, like the Piano Concertos or anything in Swan Lake and Sleeping Beauty: In terms of conventional harmonic rules (no parallel fifths or octaves for the most part, etc., after Josquin des Pres and Machaut were outmoded, although I'm not sure exactly where those medieval practices first stopped being allowed), you will have exactly the same harmonic possibilities as in Bach Fugues or Mozart arias. And only when the carillon or tubular bells are used, as I think Mel is indicating something like 'special effects' within the rest of the orchestral texture, will you have these microtonal harmonies--not as compositional practice within the basic harmony and/or counterpoint, which remains traditional even if there are ways to get some exotic effects even there (think of Scriabin for further exotic sounds.) It's not till Cage's prepared pianos, based on Javanese gamelan, and then others like Partch, who really begin to take these essentially Eastern microtones into the foundation music. So you could 'hear microtonal harmonies' in these Tchaikovsky, Mussorgsky, and Stravinsky works (and others), but it is not the same as music whose entire texture is informed and based on microtones, as in Indian music and the 20th Western music that derived from that.

Reminds me, with these Russian 'special effects', a little of the recent conversations on Ruth St. Denis, and her 'orientalisms' which were mostly effects, not yet quite organic.

Here is some good basic theory from Wiki:

Diatonic and chromatic are terms in music theory that are most often used to characterize scales, and are also applied to intervals, chords, notes, musical styles, and kinds of harmony. They are very often used as a pair, especially when applied to contrasting features of the common practice music of the period 1600–1900.[1]

These terms may mean different things in different contexts. Very often, diatonic refers to musical elements derived from the modes and transpositions of the "white note scale" C–D–E–F–G–A–B (see details below).[2] In some usages it includes all forms of heptatonic scale that are in common use in Western music (the major, and all forms of the minor).[3] Chromatic refers to structures derived from the chromatic scale, which consists of all semitones.

[Amy Reusch]

I'm tempted to say "I don't know anything about music, but I know what I like..."! I'm not sure how one would describe the similarity between Tchaikovsky, Mussorgsky and Stravinsky, but, there's almost a thickness to the sound. Ok. I better give up. Thank you for all the helpful information!

The New Yorker article by Elif Batuman was in the April 27, 2009 issue, p. 22. "The Bells: How Harvard helped preserve a Russian legacy." Like the typical NYer article, it's a vastly entertaining read.. including a bit about Boris Godunov exiling a bell to Siberia.

OK... to correct my earlier untrustworthy memories:

As it turns out, Saradzhev really was Moscow's most famous bell ringer, known not just for his ringing but also for his superhuman aural acuity: between two adjacent whole tones, he perceived not just one half tone, but a half tone flanked on either side by a hundred and twenty-one flats and and a hundred and twenty-one sharps.

When Saradzhev was seven years old, the sound of a particularly powerful church bell caused him to lose consciousness, and he was captivated for life. Although he was a skilled pianist, he always referred to the piano as "that well-tempered nitwit": a piano can produce only twelve tones per octave, whereas Saradzhev perceived one thousand seven hundred and one. This sensitivity perhaps explains Saradzhev's intense delight in Russian bells, which are unparalleled in their microtonal complexity. Each bell sounds a unique cloud of untempered frequencies, producing intervals unplayable on any twelve-tone keyboard. By such acoustic fingerprints, Saradzhev could distinguish all four thousand of Moscow's church bells. He described his hearing as "true pitch"(by contrast with perfect pitch). .....

Saradzhev sounds pretty interesting... he had wanted to compose symphonies taking advantage of these microtonal fingerprints, but was not allowed such secular access to Moscow's church bells. (despite professors at the Moscow Conservatory & Reinhold Gliere petitioning the People's Commissariat of Enlightenment, no one would give him a set of bells)

When, in 1930, Saradzhev accepted a contract to work on installing the bells at Lowell House, he thought his dream had come true. Finally, some Americans, recognizing the greatness of his bell symphonies, were going to build him a symphonic belfry in America, equipped with thirty-four Russian bells: the seventeen Danilov bells, plus seventeen others of his own choosing. One can imagine Saradzhev's feelings when he got to Harvard. Nobody was interested in the more than a hundred symphonies he had composed -- which were unplayble now, anyway, since the seventeen bells he had painstaking chosen were nowhere to be seen.

Poor savant.

Anyway... an interesting article.

But since we're on the topic of Tchaikovsky, and Nut is looming.. any recordings exist out there with the glass harmonica for Sugarplum's variation in them? I understand it was not Franklin's invention but something else?

[papeetepatrick]

Saradhev has so much pitch it's more like POST-PITCH!

Call it rambling, but this was one of the best threads ever--I doubt seriously I'd have ever found out about these things, and am now going to listen to the pieces with the bells to see whether I can tell how they interact in a microtonally harmonic way with the rest of the instruments somehow.

Prokofiev has a thick, rich sound, too, don't you think? I always think of Stravinsky as being leaner and more slender in sound, as in Soldat, and even in Sacre du Printemps there's an elegant suaveness. But there is definitely a true Russian sound, even when largely western techniques are still in effect.

[Amy Reusch]

Yes, I'm inclined to think of Stravinsky's sound not being as "thick" but there are moments in say Firebird & Petroushka... or in some of his wind orchestra pieces... but not like Tchaikovsky & Mussorgsky's sound ....

[innopac]

The New Yorker article by Elif Batuman was in the April 27, 2009 issue, p. 22. "The Bells: How Harvard helped preserve a Russian legacy."

Thank you, Amy, for the citation. It is a fascinating article.

Above all, Russian bells must never be tuned to either a major or a minor chord. "The voice of a bell is understood as just that," he [Father Roman is the head bell ringer at the Danilov Monastery] said. "Not a note, not a chord, but a voice." Whereas Western European bells are tuned on a lathe to produce familiar major and minor chords, a Russian bell is prized for its individual, untuned voice, produced by an overlay of numerous partial frequencies, with only approximate relations to traditional pitches....--a feature that gave the Lowell Klappermeisters' performances the denatured effect of music played on a touch-tone telephone. Where Western European bells play melodies, Russian bell ringing consists of rhythmic layered peals.

[GNicholls]

The New Yorker article by Elif Batuman was in the April 27, 2009 issue, p. 22. "The Bells: How Harvard helped preserve a Russian legacy."

Thank you, Amy, for the citation. It is a fascinating article.

Above all, Russian bells must never be tuned to either a major or a minor chord. "The voice of a bell is understood as just that," he [Father Roman is the head bell ringer at the Danilov Monastery] said. "Not a note, not a chord, but a voice." Whereas Western European bells are tuned on a lathe to produce familiar major and minor chords, a Russian bell is prized for its individual, untuned voice, produced by an overlay of numerous partial frequencies, with only approximate relations to traditional pitches....--a feature that gave the Lowell Klappermeisters' performances the denatured effect of music played on a touch-tone telephone. Where Western European bells play melodies, Russian bell ringing consists of rhythmic layered peals.

A fundamental tone with its overtones (higher tones with frequencies in whole number ratios to the fundamental, e.g. 1:3, 1:9) is a harmonic sonority.

If ratios between sound components are not by whole number it is an inharmonic sonority.

FM (frequency modulation) synthesis is an economical form of sound synthesis which Yamaha and Stanford University made a mint on during the 1980's (the SoundBlaster32 sound card). When I took sound synthesis back in ancient days, we used to make "FM gongs" whose ratio between carrier and modulator sound waves was 1:1.4 -- fractional not whole number. They really did sound like gongs and you could hear the "gongness" come in as the dial approached 1.4.

Please pardon the technical stuff. Actual bell acoustics are more complex than this, and I don't know much about carillons. My comments are just intended to convey the difference between Western European (more harmonic) and Russian (more inharmonic) bell sonorities as described by Innopac. Interesting stuff ...

[GNicholls]

From a musical composition perspective, the distinctive "Russian" orchestral sound also relates to the ever-expanding orchestra of the late 19th-early 20th century. There were triple, sometimes quadruple woodwinds (i.e. 4 each of the flute, oboe, clarinet family, and bassoon families), augmented low brass, and large string sections that could be divided effectively to add more pitches). Even Tchaikovsky's much-used harp could be a sort of orchestras's "reverb unit" that sustained the sound. All this contributed to the musical texture very accurately described by Amy Reusch as "thick," particularly in the low registers, e.g. when the cellos and double basses are divided and play pitches that are close together. Going back to my previous message, this close spacing would produce more "rough," inharmonic sounds, becasue it is opposite to the natural spacing of the harmonic series, where lower pitches are spaced wide apart and higher ones closer together (think of the "thin" clarity of Mozart's orchestration).

In addition to the Russian bells, another influence was the choral music of the Russian Orthodox Church with the famous low bass voices. Listen to the lesser-known music for chorus written by the same composers during the same historical period, to understand the Russian orchestral sound.

Some thought Mussorgsky's "thick" orchestration dull or even incompetent. Two of the greatest orchestrators who ever lived took on the task of adding greater brilliance and variety. Boris Godunov was re-orchestrated by Rimsky-Korsakov and the piano work Pictures at an Exhibition was transcribed for orchestra by Ravel. But there is argument over whether or how much Mussorgsky wanted this.

As a western-trained classical musician I learned to consider these thick low textures as "muddy," like too much piano pedal, therefore bad. But now that we in the west have heard the music of Central Asia, e.g. Siberian or Tibetan chant, we have another reference point for thick, rough sounds, for appreciating aesthetic preferences from the east that differ from ours.