Lad |

Greek armonia, lat. modulatio, modus, French and English. mode, ital. modo, germ. Tongeschlecht; glory. harmony – harmony, peace, harmony, order

Contents:

I. Definition of mode II. Etymology III. Essence of mode IV. The intonation nature of the sound material of the mode V. The main categories and types of the modal system, their genesis VI. Organism and dialectics VII. Fret formation mechanism VIII. Fret classification IX. Fret history X. History of the Teachings on the Mode

I. Definition of mode. 1) L. in aesthetic. sense – agreeable to the ear consistency between the sounds of the pitch system (i.e., in essence, the same as harmony in the musical-aesthetic sense); 2) L. in the musical-theoretical sense – the systemic nature of high-altitude connections, united by a central sound or consonance, as well as a specific sound system embodying it (usually in the form of a scale). Thus, it is possible to speak about L. as any expediently ordered intonational system, and about modes as about separate. such systems. The term “L.” it is also used to denote major or minor (more correctly, inclination), to denote a scale-like system of sounds (more correctly, a scale). Aesthetic and music-theoretical. aspects constitute two sides of a single concept of L., and aesthetic. the moment is leading in this unity. In the broad sense of the concept “L.” and “harmony” are very close. More specifically, harmony is more often associated with consonances and their successions (predominantly with the vertical aspect of the pitch system), and linearity with the interdependence and semantic differentiation of the sounds of the system (i.e., predominantly with the horizontal aspect). Russian components. the concept of “L.” answer the above Greek, Lat., French, English, Italian, German. terms, as well as such terms as “tonality”, “scale” and some others.

II. The etymology of the term “L.” is not entirely clear. Czech lad – order; Polish lad – harmony, order; Ukrainian L. – consent, order. Related Russian. “get along”, “okay”, “okay”, other Russian. “laditi” – to reconcile; “Lada” – husband (wife), also beloved (lover). Perhaps the term is associated with the words “lagoda” (peace, order, arrangement, adaptation), Czech. lahoda (pleasantness, charm), other Russian. lagoditi (to do something nice). The complex meanings of the word “L.” close to Greek armonia (fastening, connection; harmony, peace, order; order, harmony; coherence; harmony, harmony); accordingly, a couple is formed by “getting along” (adjusting, fitting, putting in order, setting up a musical instrument; living peacefully, agreeing) and armozo, armotto (fitting, fastening, adjusting, tuning, fitting tightly, marrying). Rus. the concept of “L.” also includes Greek. category “genus” (genos), for example. diatonic, chromatic, “enharmonic” genera (and their corresponding groups, qualities of modes).

III. The essence of harmony. L. as an agreement between sounds belongs to the indigenous aesthetic. categories of music, coinciding in this sense with the concept of “harmony” (German: Harmonie; in contrast to Harmonik and Harmonielehre). Any music. a work, regardless of its specific content, must first of all be music, i.e. harmonious interaction of sounds; the same aesthetic. the meaning of the category L. (and harmony) is included as an essential part in the idea of ​​music as beautiful (music is not as a sound construction, but as a kind of coherence that gives pleasure to the ear). L. as aesthetic. category (“coherence”) is the basis for the emergence and consolidation in societies. consciousness defined. systemic relationships between sounds. The “radiance of order” (the logical side of L.) expressed by the sounds of L. refers to the main means of his aesthetic. impact. Therefore, L. in a particular product. always represents the focus of the musical. The power of lexicon (respectively, its aesthetic impact) is connected with its aestheticizing ability to organize “raw” sound material, as a result of which it turns into harmonious forms of “consonant sounds”. As a whole, L. is revealed in the fullness of the structure, covering the entire complex of its components – from sound material through logical. ordering of elements to crystallization specifically aesthetic. systemic relations of measure, proportionality, mutual correspondence (in the broad sense – symmetry). Also important is the individual concretization of a certain L. in a given composition, revealing the richness of its possibilities and naturally unfolding into an extensive modal construction. From the aesthetic essence of L. follows a circle of basic theoretical problems: the embodiment of L. in a sound construction; fret structure and its types; logical and historical their connection with each other; the problem of the unity of modal evolution; the functioning of L. as the material and sound basis of the muses. compositions. The primary form of embodiment of modal relations in the sound concreteness of music is melodic. motive (in sound expression – a horizontal scale formula) – always remains the simplest (and therefore most important, fundamental) presentation of the essence of L. Hence the particular meaning of the term “L.” associated with melodic. scales, which are often called frets.

IV. The intonation nature of the sound material of the mode. The sound material from which the lantern is built is essential for any of its structures and for any type of lantern. d1-c1, d1-e1, f1-e1, etc.) and consonance (primarily c1-e1-g1 as central), embody its character (“ethos”), expression, coloring, and other aesthetic quality.

In turn, the sound material is determined by concrete historical. the conditions for the existence of music, its content, socially determined forms of music-making. A kind of “birth” of L. (that is, the moment of transition of music as an emotional experience into its sound form) is covered by the concept of intonation (also intonation) introduced by B. V. Asafiev. Being “borderline” in essence (standing at the site of direct contact between natural life and artistic and musical), the concept of “intonation” thereby captures the influence of socio-historical. factors on the evolution of sound material – intonation. complexes and the forms of modal organization that depend on them. Hence the interpretation of modal formulas as a reflection of the historically determined content of music: “the genesis and existence of … intonational complexes are necessarily due to their social functions,” therefore, the intonational (and modal) system of a particular historical. era is determined by the “structure of this social formation” (B. V. Asafiev). Thus, containing intonation in the embryo. the sphere of his era, the formula of L. is intonation. a complex associated with the worldview of its time (for example, the Middle Ages. frets in the end – a reflection of the consciousness of the feudal era with its isolation, stiffness; the dur-moll system is an expression of the dynamism of the musical consciousness of the so-called European modern time etc.). In this sense, the modal formula is an extremely concise model of the world in the representation of its era, a kind of “genetic code of music”. According to Asafiev, L. is “the organization of the tones that make up the system of music given by an era in their interaction,” and “this system is never absolutely complete,” but “always is in a state of formation and transformation”; L. fixes and generalizes the “intonation dictionary of the era” characteristic of each history, period (“the sum of music that has firmly settled in the public consciousness” – Asafiev). This also explains the “intonation crises”, which more or less radically renew both sound intonation. material, so, following this, and the general structure of the landscape (especially on the verges of large epochs, for example, at the turn of the 16th-17th or 19th-20th centuries). For example, the favorite romantic emphasizing of dissonant dominant-like harmonies (L.’s sound material) in Scriabin’s later works gave a new qualitative result and led to a radical restructuring of the entire L. system in his music. The historical fact – the change of modal formulas – is, therefore, an external (fixed in theoretical schemes) expression of the deep processes of the evolution of linguistics as a living and continuous formation of intonation. models of the world.

V. The main categories and types of the modal system, their genesis. Main categories and types of music are formed under the influence of the development of music. consciousness (part of the general process of the progressive development of consciousness, ultimately under the influence of practical social activities of man in the development of the world). An indispensable condition of sounding is the ordering “consent” of sounds (a kind of functional sounding constant) with a progressive (on the whole) quantitative increase in the volume of sound material and the boundaries covered by it. This makes it necessary to match. milestone points in the evolution of fundamental qualitative changes in the forms of existence of the L. and creates the possibility of the emergence of new types of modal structures. At the same time, according to the essence of L. in its three main aspects – sound (intonation), logical (connection) and aesthetic (coherence, beauty) – there is an internal. perestroika (in reality, this trinity is one and the same indivisible essence: consent, L., but only considered in different aspects). The driving moment is the renewal of intonation. system (up to the “crisis of intonations” underlying L.), which makes further changes necessary. Specifically, the types and types of phonics are realized as systems of intervals and the horizontal rows and vertical groups (chords) made up of them (see Sound system). “Mode is a display of all manifestations of the intonations of the era, reduced to a system of intervals and scales” (Asafiev). L. as a certain sound system is formed on the basis of the use of physical. (acoustic) properties of sound material, first of all, the relations of sound kinship inherent in it, revealed through intervals. However, interval, melodic-scale, and other relations do not function as purely mathematical. or physical. given, but as the “quintessence” of the “sound statements” of a person generalized by them (Asafiev). (Hence the fundamental inaccuracy in relation to L. the so-called exact, i.e., quantitatively measuring, methods, “art-measurement”.)

The first of the most important stages in the evolution of categories of linear — the formation of foundations within the framework of the primitive “ecmelic” (i.e., without a certain pitch) gliding. The persistence as a category of modal thinking is genetically the first establishment of the certainty of linearity in height (the dominant tone as a logically ordering central element) and in time (the identity of the persistence to itself, preserved despite the fluidity of time by returning to the same tone remaining in the memory); with the advent of the category of foundation, the very concept of L. as a kind of sound structure arises. Historical L.’s type – singing the tone (corresponding to the “stage of stability” in the evolution of L.) is found in ethnic. groups at a relatively low stage of development. The next (logically and historically) type of lyricism is monodic lyricism with a developed and definite melodic style. sound row (modal type, modal system) is typical for old European songs. peoples, incl. and Russian, Middle Ages. European chorale, other Russian. chanter lawsuit; also found in the folklore of many non-Europeans. peoples. The type of “singing the tone”, apparently, is adjacent to the modal (since it is also monodic). A special modal type is the so-called. accordion h. tonality europ. music of the new time. The names of the greatest geniuses of world music are associated with it. harmonic the tonality differs sharply from the polyphony of the bagpipe or heterophonic warehouse (among ancient peoples, in folk, extra-European music). In the 20th century (especially in the countries of European culture) types of high-altitude structures that differ from all previous ones (in serial, sonorous, electronic music) have become widespread. The very possibility of classifying them as L. is the subject of controversy; this problem is still far from being resolved. In addition to the main types of L., there are many intermediate, relatively stable and independent types (for example, the modal harmony of the European Renaissance, especially the 15th-16th centuries).

VI. Organism and dialectics of the process of mode evolution. The process of evolution of the phenomenon and the concept of “L.” organic and, moreover, possesses a dialectic. character. The organic nature of the process lies in the preservation and development of the same primary categories of linearity, the emergence of other categories on their basis. categories and their development as relatively independent, subjecting all evolution to the same general principles. The most important of them is growth (number. increase, eg. the growth of the scale from tetrachord to hexachord), the complication of forms of agreement, the transition of quantities. changes in qualitative, one-pointedness of the whole evolution. Thus, the singing of a qualitatively defined, constantly renewed tone, spreading to a group of others. tones (growth), necessitates new forms of coordination – the isolation of adjacent tones and the selection of the nearest melodic as the second foundation. consonances (complication of the forms of agreement; see. Consonance); in the resulting higher type L. already all tones (the former quality) turn out to be qualitatively defined and periodically renewed; however, the independence of most of them is limited to the dominance of one, sometimes two or three (a new quality). The strengthening of the quart or quint, as single-functional tones of the fret rod, ripening within the framework of modality, makes it possible to turn these horizontal consonances into vertical ones. Historically, this corresponds to the Middle Ages. Yes, in V. Oddington (ca. 1300) the equality of horizontal and vertical consonances as categories of L. fixed in their definition by the same term “harmony” (harmonia simplex and harmonia multiplex). The concept of consonance as an expression of functional identity extends further to the next complexity intervals – thirds (growth); hence the reorganization of the entire system of L. (complication of forms of agreement). At 20 in. a new step is taken in the same direction: the following group of intervals is introduced into the circle of aesthetically optimal intervals – seconds, sevenths and tritones (growth), and the use of new sound means is also associated with this (sonorally interpreted consonances, series of one or another interval composition, etc.) and corresponding changes in the forms of harmonization of sound elements with each other. The dialectic of evolution L. consists in the fact that the genetically subsequent, higher type of modal organization, in the final analysis, is nothing but the previous one, developed in new conditions. So, modality is, as it were, a “singing” of a higher order: the basic tone-stay is adorned with a move through another. tones, to-rye, in turn, can be interpreted as foundations; in harmony. Several systems play a similar role in tonality (at different levels of the modal structure): the reference chord tone and adjacent sounds (auxiliary), tonic and non-tonic chords, local ch. tonality and deviations, general ch. tonality and subordinate tonalities. Moreover, ever higher modal forms continue to be structural modifications of a single, melodic in nature primary form – intonation (“the essence of intonation is melodic” – Asafiev). The chord is also intonational (consonance, formed as a verticalization of a temporary unit, retains its original quality in a “folded” form – melodic. movement), and a timbre-sonor complex (not “deployed” like a chord, but interpreted on the basis of a chord in its new quality). The same is true for other components of L. Hence the dialectical main metamorphosis. category L. For example, the category of foundation has evolved next.

RESISTANCE: – main. basic sound. main interval conson. main chord. diss. chord series – finalis tonic center. sound or consonance – tone (=mode) tonality certain intonation. sphere – main key main intonation. sphere

Hence the dialectic of the concept of “L.” (it absorbs and contains in itself, as various semantic layers, the entire history of its centuries-old formation-deployment):

1) the ratio of stability and instability (from the stage of “singing the tone”; hence the tradition to represent L. ch. sound, for example, “IV church tone”, i.e. tone Mi),

2) a melodic-sound system of qualitatively differentiated tonal relationships (from the stage of modality; hence the tradition to represent phonation primarily in the form of a scale table, to distinguish between two phonics with one basic tone, i.e. tonality proper and tonality),

3) assignment to the category L. of systems and harmonic-chord type, not necessarily differentiated in relation to the definiteness of the scale and the unambiguity of the main. tones (for example, in the later works of Scriabin; modeled on harmonic tonality). The sound formulas representing L. also evolve dialectically. The prototype (too primitive) is the central tone-stand, surrounded by melismatic. fabric (“variation” of tone). The ancient principle of melody-model (in various cultures: nom, raga, poppies, pathet, etc.; Russian vowel singing) should be considered a genuine example of L.. The principle of the melody-model is characteristic primarily for the eastern modes (India, the Soviet East, the Middle East region). In harmonic. tonality – scale movement, adjustable center. triad (revealed in the works of G. Schenker). The dodecaphone series, which determines the intonation, can be considered as an analogue. the structure and pitch structure of a serial composition (see Dodecaphony, Series).

VII. Mechanism of fret formation. The mechanism of action of the factors forming L. is not the same in decomp. systems. The general principle of fret formation can be represented as the implementation of creativity. act by high-rise means, using the possibilities of ordering contained in this sound, intonation. material. From tech. On the other hand, the goal is to achieve a meaningful coherence of sounds, which is felt as something musically harmonious, i.e. L. The most ancient principle of the composition of L. is based on the properties of the first consonance – unison (1: 1; the formation of abutment and its melismatic singing). In old melodic L. the main factor in the structure, as a rule, also become the following simplest intervals. Of those who give sounds of a different quality, these are the fifth (3:2) and the fourth (4:3); thanks to the interaction with the linear melodic. regularities they change places; as a result, the fourth becomes more important than the fifth. Quarte (as well as fifth) coordination of tones organizes the scale; it also regulates the establishment and fixation of other reference tones of L. (typical for many folk songs). Hence the diatonic structure similar to L. The reference tone can be constant, but also shifting (modal variability), which is partly due to the genre nature of melodies. The presence of a reference tone and its repetition is the main core of L.; fourth-quint diatonic is an expression of the simplest modal connection of the whole structure.

“Opekalovskaya” manuscript (17th century?). “Come, let us please Joseph.”

Stand – sound g1; a1 – adjacent to g1 and closely related to it through d1 (g:d=d:a). Further, a1 and g1 produce a tetrachord a1-g1-f1-e1 and a second, lower singing sound f1 (local support). The continuation of the gamma line gives the tetrachord f1-e1-d1-c1 with a local stop d1. The interaction of foundations g1-d1 constitutes the framework of the L. At the end of the example is the general scheme of the L. of the entire stichera (of which only 1/50 of its part is given here). The specificity of the modal structure is in the “floating” character, the absence of the energy of movement and gravity (the absence of gravity does not negate the linearity, since the presence of stability and gravity is the main property of not every type of linearity).

L. of the major-minor type are based on the relationship not of the “troika” (3:2, 4:3), but of the “five” (5:4, 6:5). One step on the scale of sound relations (after the quarter-quint, the tert is the closest) means, however, a gigantic difference in the structure and expression of L., a change in musical-historical. epochs. Just as each tone of the old L. was regulated by perfect consonant relations, here it is regulated by imperfect consonant relations (see the example below; n is a passing, c is an auxiliary sound).

In the music of the Viennese classics, these relationships are also emphasized by the regularity of the rhythms. shifts and symmetry of accents (bar 2 and its harmony D – hard time, 4th – its T – doubly hard).

(T|D¦D|T) |1+1| |1 1|

Real modal proportions therefore speak of the predominance of tonic. harmony over dominant. (In this case, there is no S; for the Viennese classics, it is typical to avoid side steps that enrich the L., but at the same time deprive it of mobility.) The peculiarity of L. – eliminates. centralization, dynamics, efficiency; highly defined and strong gravitations; the multilayered nature of the system (for example, in one layer a given chord is stable in relation to the sounds gravitating into it; in the other, it is unstable, itself gravitating towards the local tonic, etc.).

W. A. ​​Mozart. The Magic Flute, Papageno’s aria.

In modern music, there is a tendency towards the individualization of L., i.e. to identifying it with an individual specific complex of intonations (melodic, chordal, timbre-coloristic, etc.) characteristic of a given piece or theme. In contrast to typical modal formulas (melody-model in ancient L., typified melodic or chord sequences in the Middle Ages L., in the classical major-minor modal system), an individual complex-model is taken as the basis, sometimes completely replacing the traditional . elements of L., even among composers who generally adhere to the tonal principle. In this way, modal structures are formed that combine any modal elements in any proportion (eg, major mode + whole-tone scales + softly dissonant chord progressions outside the major-minor system). Such structures as a whole can be classified as polymodal (not only in simultaneity, but also in succession and in the combination of their constituent elements).

The individual character of the fragment is given not by the triad T C-dur, but by the chord cgh-(d)-f (compare with the 1st chord of the main theme: chdfgc, number 3). The selection of harmonies only with a major basis and with sharp dissonances, as well as the sonorant (timbre-coloristic) coloring of the consonances duplicating the melody, result in a certain effect, however peculiar only to this fragment – an extremely intense and sharpened major, where the light shade of the sound inherent in the major is brought to a dazzling brightness.

W. A. ​​Mozart. The Magic Flute, Papageno’s aria.

VIII. The classification of modes is extremely complex. Its determining factors are: the genetic stage of development of modal thinking; interval complexity of the structure; ethnic, historical, cultural, style features. Only on the whole and in the final analysis does the line of evolution of L. turn out to be unidirectional. Numerous examples of how the transition to a higher in general genetic. steps at the same time means the loss of part of the values ​​of the previous one and, in this sense, a movement back. So, the conquest of the polyphony of the Western European. civilization is the greatest step forward, but it was accompanied (for 1000-1500 years) by the loss of wealth chromatic. and “enarmonic.” genera of monodic antique. fret system. The complexity of the task is also due to the fact that many categories turn out to be closely related, not amenable to complete separation: L., tonality (tonal system), sound system, scale, etc. It is advisable to limit ourselves to pointing out the most important types of modal systems as points of concentration of the main. patterns of fret formation: ecmelica; anhemitonics; diatonic; chromaticity; microchromatic; special types; mixed systems (the division into these types basically coincides with the differentiation of genera, Greek genn).

Ekmelika (from the Greek exmelns – extra-melodic; a system where sounds do not have a certain exact pitch) as a system in the proper sense of the word is almost never found. It is used only as a technique within a more developed system (sliding intonation, elements of speech intonation, a special performing manner). Ekmelik also includes melismatic (altitude indefinite) singing of a precisely fixed tone – upstoi (according to Yu. N. Tyulin, in the singing of Armenian Kurds “one sustained tone … is wrapped around with various graces saturated with extraordinary rhythmic energy”; impossible”).

Anhemitonics (more precisely, anhemitonic pentatonics), characteristic of many. to the ancient cultures of Asia, Africa and Europe, apparently, constitutes a general stage in the development of modal thinking. The constructive principle of anhemitonics is communication through the simplest consonances. The structural limit is a semitone (hence the limitation of five steps in an octave). A typical intonation is trichord (e.g. ega). Anhemitonics can be incomplete (3-4, sometimes even 2 steps), complete (5 steps), variable (eg, transitions from cdega to cdfga). Semitone pentatonic (for example, type hcefg) classifies the transitional form to diatonic. An example of anhemitonics is the song “Paradise, Paradise” (“50 songs of the Russian people” by A. K. Lyadov).

Diatonic (in its pure form – a 7-step system, where tones can be arranged in hours of fifths) – the most important and common system of L. The structural limit is chromatism (2 semitones in a row). The design principles are different; the most important are the fifth (Pythagorean) diatonic (a structural element is a pure fifth or quart) and triadic (a structural element is a consonant third chord), examples are ancient Greek modes, medieval modes, European modes. nar. music (also many other non-European peoples); church polyphonic L. europ. music of the Renaissance, L. major-minor system (without chromatization). Typical intonations are tetrachord, pentachord, hexachord, filling the gaps between the tones of tertian chords, etc. Diatonic is rich in types. It can be incomplete (3-6 steps; see, for example, guidon hexachords, folk and Greek tetrachords; an example of a 6-step diatonic is the hymn “Ut queant laxis”), complete (7-step hcdefga type or octave cdefgahc; examples are countless), variable (e.g. fluctuations of ahcd and dcba in the 1st church tone), composite (e.g. Russian everyday L.: GAHcdefgab-c1-d1), conditional (e.g. “hemiol” frets with incremental second – harmonic minor and major, “Hungarian” scale, etc.; “Podgalian scale”: gah-cis-defg; melodic minor and major, etc.), polydiatonic (for example, a piece by B. Bartok “In the Russian style” in the collection “Microcosmos”, No 90). Further complications lead to chromatics.

Chromatics. Specific sign – the sequence of two or more semitones in a row. The structural limit is microchromatics. The design principles are different; the most important – melodic. chromatic (e.g., in eastern monody), chord-harmonic (alteration, side D and S, chords with chromatic linear tones in the European major-minor system), enharmonic. Chromatics in European (and further in non-European) music of the 20th century. based on equal temperament. Chromatics can be incomplete (Greek chromatic; alteration in European harmony; L. symmetrical structure, i.e. dividing 12 semitones of an octave into equal parts) and complete (complementary polydiatonic, some types of chromatic tonality, dodecaphonic, microserial and serial structures).

Microchromatic (microinterval, ultrachromatic). Sign – the use of intervals less than a semitone. It is more often used as a component of L. of the previous three systems; can merge with ecmelica. Typical microchromatic – Greek. enharmonic genus (for example, in tones – 2, 1/4, 1/4), Indian shruti. In modern music is used on a different basis (especially by A. Khaba; also by V. Lutoslavsky, S. M. Slonimsky, and others).

For example, East Asian slindro and pylog (respectively – 5- and 7-step, relatively equal division of the octave) can be attributed to special L.. Any modal systems (especially anhemitonic, diatonic and chromatic) can be mixed with each other, both in simultaneity and in succession (within the same construction).

IX. The history of modes is ultimately a successive disclosure of the possibilities of “agreement” (“L.”) between sounds; actually history is not just an alternation of decomp. systems of L., and the gradual coverage of more and more distant and complex sound relations. Already in Dr. world arose (and to a certain extent preserved) the modal systems of the countries of the East: China, India, Persia, Egypt, Babylonia, etc. (see the corresponding articles). Non-semitone pentatonic scales (China, Japan, other countries of the Far East, partly India), 7-step (diatonic and non-diatonic) phonics have become widespread; for many cultures are specific to L. with increase. second (Arabic music), microchromatic (India, Arab countries of the East). The expressiveness of modes was recognized as a natural force (parallels between the names of tones and celestial bodies, natural elements, seasons, organs of the human body, ethical properties of the soul, etc.); the immediacy of the impact of L. on the human soul was emphasized, each L. was endowed with a certain expression. meaning (as in modern music – major and minor). A. Jami (2nd half of the 15th century) wrote: “Each of the twelve (maqams), each avaze and shu’be has its own special effect (on the listeners), in addition to the property common to all of them to give pleasure.” The most important stages in the history of European linguistics are the ancient modal system (not so much European as Mediterranean; until the middle of the 1st millennium) and the “properly European” modal system of the 9th–20th centuries, in historical and cultural typological terms. sense – “Western” system, German. abendländische, divided into the early Middle Ages. modal system (historical boundaries are indefinite: it originated in the melodies of the early Christian church, entrenched in the 7th-9th centuries, then gradually grew into the modal harmony of the Renaissance; typologically, the other Russian modal system also belongs here), cf. the modal system of the 9th-13th centuries, the Renaissance system (conditionally 14th-16th centuries), the tonal (major-minor) system (17th-19th centuries; in a modified form it is also used in the 20th century), the new height system of the 20th . (See articles Key, Natural modes, Symmetrical modes).

Antich. the modal system is based on tetrachords, from the combination of which with each other octave Ls are formed. Between the tones of a quart, the most varied midtones in height are possible (three kinds of tetrachords: diatone, chromium, “enarmony”). In L., their direct-sensory influence is valued (according to this or that “ethos”), the diversity, variegation of all possible varieties of L. (example: Skoliya Seikila).

L. early western-European. Middle Ages due to historical features of the era have come down to us Ch. arr. in connection with the church. music. As a reflection of a different intonation system, they are characterized by severe (up to asceticism) diatonicism and seem colorless and emotionally one-sided in comparison with the sensual fullness of the ancient ones. At the same time, Middle Ages. L. is distinguished by a greater focus on the inner moment (initially, even to the detriment of the actual artistic side of the art, according to the guidelines of the church). Wed-century. L. show a further complication of the structure of the diatonic. L. (guidonian hexachord instead of the ancient tetrachord; West-European harmonic polyphony reveals a fundamentally different nature in comparison with ancient heterophony). The folk and secular music of the Middle Ages, apparently, was distinguished by a different structure and expressiveness of L.

Similar app. Wed-century. chorale culture other-rus. chanter art-va also includes more ancient modal components (quart extra-octave of the “everyday scale”; a stronger influence of the ancient principle of the melody-model is in chants, voices).

In the Middle Ages (9th-13th centuries), a new (compared to the ancient) polyphony arose and flourished, which significantly influenced the modal system and its categories, and prepared the historical. fundamentally different type. L. (L. as a polyphonic structure).

The modal system of the Renaissance, while retaining much from the system of the Middle Ages, is distinguished by the emotional full-bloodedness that has developed on a new basis, the warmth of humanity, and the rich development of specificity. traits of L. (especially characteristic: lush polyphony, introductory tone, dominance of triads).

In the era of the so-called. new time (17-19 centuries), the major-minor modal system, which originated in the Renaissance, reaches dominance. Aesthetically, the richest in comparison with all the earlier (despite the limitation by the minimum number of phonics) major-minor system is a different type of lyric, where polyphony, chord is not just a form of presentation, but an important component of li. the principle of the major-minor system, like the L., is distinct changes in “micro-modes,” or chords. Actually, “harmonic tonality” turns out to be a special modification of the category L., “single mode” (Asafiev) with two moods (major and minor).

In parallel with the ongoing development of harmonic tonality in the 19th and 20th centuries. there is a revival as an independent. category and L. melodic. type. From the expanding and modifying major-minor tonal system, special diatonic L. (already outlined by Mozart and Beethoven, widely used in the 19th and early 20th centuries by romantics and composers of new national schools – F. Chopin, E. Grieg, M. P. Mussorgsky, N. A. Rimsky-Korsakov, A. K. Lyadov, I. F. Stravinsky and others), as well as the anhemitone pentatonic scale (by F. Liszt, R. Wagner, Grieg, A. P. Borodin, in the early works of Stravinsky, etc.). The increasing chromatization of L. stimulates the growth of symmetrical L., the scale of which divides the 12 semitones of the octave into parts of equal size; this gives the whole tonic, equal-thermal and tritone systems (in Chopin, Liszt, Wagner, K. Debussy, O. Messiaen, M. I. Glinka, A. S. Dargomyzhsky, P. I. Tchaikovsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, A. N. Scriabin, Stravinsky, A. N. Cherepnin and others).

In European music of the 20th century all sorts of types of L. and systems adjoin and mix with each other up to microchromatic (A. Haba), the use of non-European. modality (Messian, J. Cage).

X. The history of the teachings about the mode. The theory of L., reflecting their history, is the most ancient subject of research in music. science. The problem of L. enters into the theory of harmony and partly coincides with the problem of harmony. Therefore, the study of the problem of L. originally carried out as a study of the problem of harmony (armonia, harmonie). The first scientific explanation L. (harmony) in Europe. musicology belongs to the Pythagorean school (6-4 centuries BC). BC.). Explaining harmony and L. based on the theory of number, the Pythagoreans emphasized the importance of the simplest sound relations (within the so-called. tetrad) as a factor regulating ice formation (reflection in the theory of L. phenomena of tetrachords and “stable” sounds of fourth consonance). Pythagorean science was interpreted by L. and music. harmony as a reflection of world harmony, without which the world would fall apart (i.e. actually looked at L. as a model of the world – a microcosm). From here developed later (in Boethius, Kepler) cosmological. идеи worldly music and human music. The cosmos itself (according to the Pythagoreans and Plato) was tuned in a certain way (celestial bodies were likened to the tones of the Greek. Dorian mode: e1-d1-c1-hagfe). Greek science (Pythagoreans, Aristoxen, Euclid, Bacchius, Cleonides, etc.) created and developed music. theory L. and specific modes. She developed the most important concepts of L. – tetrachord, octave row (armonia), foundations (nstotes), central (middle) tone (mesn), dynamis (dunamis), ecmelika (region of intervals with complicated relationships, as well as sounds without a certain pitch), etc. In fact, all Greek the theory of harmony was the theory of L. and frets as monophonic high-pitched structures. Music. the science of the early Middle Ages reworked antique on a new basis. (Pythagorean, Platonic, Neoplatonic) ideas about harmony and L. as an aesthetic categories. The new interpretation is connected with the Christian-theological. interpretation of the harmony of the universe. The Middle Ages created a new doctrine of frets. Appearing first in the works of Alcuin, Aurelian of Reome and Regino of Prüm, they were first accurately recorded in musical notation by the anonymous author of the treatise “Alia musica” (c. 9th century). Borrowed from the Greek the theory of the name L. (Dorian, Phrygian, etc.), middle-century. science attributed them to other scales (a ubiquitous version; however, a different point of view was also expressed; see. the work of M. Dabo-Peranycha, 1959). With the structure of the Middle Ages. L. the origin of the terms “finalis”, “repercussion” (tenor, tuba; from the 17th century to also “dominant”), “ambitus”, which retained their significance for the later monophonic L. In parallel with the theory of octaves L. from the 11th century (from Guido d’Arezzo) developed practical. a solmization system based on the major hexachord as a structural unit in the modal system (see. Solmization, Hexachord). The practice of solmization (existed until the 18th c. and left a noticeable mark in the terminology of the theory of L.) prepared some categories of historically following the modes of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance of the major-minor modal system. In Glarean’s treatise “Dodecachord” (1547), two L. – Ionian and Aeolian (with their plagal varieties). From the 17th century dominated by L. major-minor tonal-functional system. The first versatile systematic an explanation of the structure of major and minor as such (in contrast and partly in opposition to their predecessors – the Ionian and Aeolian church. tones) is given in the works of J. F. Rameau, especially in the “Treatise on Harmony” (1722). New L. Europ. music were correctly understood by Rameau on the basis of “triple proportion”, i.e.

hcdefga sounds main GCCFCF tones. | – || – |

Mode (mode) is both the law of the sequence of sounds, and the order of their sequence.

As part of the doctrine of harmony 18-19 centuries. The theory of tonality developed as a theory of tonality with concepts and terms characteristic of it (the term “tonality” was first used by F. A. J. Castile-Blaz in 1821).

New modal systems (both non-diatonic and diatonic) in Western Europe. theories were reflected in the works of F. Busoni (“113 different scales”, microchromatics), A. Schoenberg, J. Setaccioli, O. Messiaen, E. Lendvai, J. Vincent, A. Danielu, A. Khaba and others.

The detailed theory of L. developed in research Nar. music V. F. Odoevsky A. N. Serova, P. AP Sokalsky A. C. Famintsyna, A. D. Kastalsky, B. М. Belyaeva X. C. Kushnareva, K. AT. Tickets, etc. In Russia, one of the first works that covered the phenomena of L. was “Musician Ideagrammar…” by N. AP Diletsky (2nd half. 17th century). The author affirms a threefold division of music (“according to meaning”): into “merry” (an obvious parallel with the designation of major introduced by Zarlino – harmonie “allegra”), “pitiful” (corresponds to minor; in Tsarlino – “mesta”; in the musical example, Diletsky harmonic minor) and “mixed” (where both types alternate). The basis of the “merry music” is “tone ut-mi-sol”, “pitiful” – “tone re-fa-la”. In the 1st sex. 19 in. М. D. Frisky (who, according to Odoevsky, “established for the first time our technical musical language”) secured in the fatherlands. ice terminology itself the term “L.”. The development of the modal system in connection with the Russian. church. music in the 19th and 20th centuries. were doing D. AT. Razumovsky, I. AND. Voznesensky, V. М. Metalov, M. AT. Brazhnikov, N. D. Uspensky. Razumovsky systematized the historically evolving systems of L. church. music, developed the theory of Russian. agreement in connection with the categories of “region”, “dominant” and “final” sounds (analogy of zap. «ambitus», «reperkusse» and «finalis»). Metallov emphasized the importance of the totality of chants in the characterization of the voice. N. A. Lvov (1790) drew attention to the specific honors a.k.a. L. from European system. Odoevsky (1863, 1869) studied the characteristic features of fret formation in Russian. Nar (and church) music and properties that distinguish it from the app. melodics (avoidance of certain jumps, the absence of introductory tone gravitation, strict diatonicism), suggested using the term “glamor” (diatonic. heptachord) instead of the western “tone”. For harmonization in the spirit of Russian. Frets Odoevsky considered suitable pure triads, without seventh chords. The discrepancy between the structure of the planks. performance and “ugly tempered scale” fp. led him to the idea of ​​”arranging an untempered piano” (Odoevsky’s instrument was preserved). Serov, studying the modal side of Rus. Nar songs “in its opposition to Western European music” (1869-71), opposed the “prejudice” of the West. scientists consider all music only “from the point of view of two keys (i.e. modes) – major and minor. He recognized the equality of two types of “grouping” (structure) of the scale – octave and fourth (with reference to the theory of the Greek. L.). Rus. the quality of L. he (like Odoevsky) considered strict diatonicism – as opposed to zap. major and minor (with its note sensible), lack of modulation (“Russian song knows neither major nor minor, and never modulates”). The structure of L. he interpreted as a clutch (“bunches”) of tetrachords; instead of modulation, he believed “free disposal of tetrachords.” In harmonizing songs for the sake of observing Russian. character, he objected to the use of tonic, dominant and subdominant chords (i.e. I, V and IV steps), recommending side (“minor”) triads (in major – II, III, VI steps). Famintsyn (1889) studied the remains of the most ancient (still pagan) layers in the Nar. music and mode formation (partly anticipating in this some ideas of B. Bartoka and Z. Kodaya). He put forward the theory of three “layers” in the historically developing system of fret formation – the “oldest” – pentatonic, “newer” – 7-step diatonic, and “newest” – major and minor. Kastalsky (1923) showed “the originality and independence of the Russian system. Nar polyphony from the rules and dogmas of Europe. systems. ” He also drew attention to the Russian.

B. L. Yavorskii gave a special scientific development of the concept and theory of linearity. His merit was the selection of the category L. as an independent one. Muses. a work, according to Yavorsky, is nothing more than the unfolding of rhythm in time (the name of Yavorsky’s concept is “Theory of Modal Rhythm”; see Modal Rhythm). In contrast to the traditional dual fret of European In the major-minor system, Yavorsky substantiated the multiplicity of L. (increased, chain, variable, diminished, double major, double minor, double augmented, X-modes, etc.). From the theory of modal rhythm comes the tradition of Russian. musicology should not attribute the pitch systems that have gone beyond major and minor to some kind of unorganized “atonalism”, but explain them as special modes. Yavorsky divided the concepts of linearity and tonality (a specific high-altitude organization and its position at a certain high-altitude level). B. V. Asafiev expressed a number of profound ideas about L. in his writings. Linking the structure of L. with intonation. nature of music, he essentially created the core of the original and fruitful concept of L. (see also the initial sections of this article).

Asafiev also developed the problems of introducing tonalities in Europe. L., his evolution; valuable in theory. in relation to his disclosure of the modal diversity of Glinka’s Ruslan and Lyudmila, Asafiev’s interpretation of the 12-step L., understanding of L. as a complex of intonations. Means. the contribution to the study of the problems of L. was made by the work of other owls. theoreticians – Belyaev (the idea of ​​a 12-step rhythm, systematization of the modes of oriental music), Yu. seconds; the theory of modal variable functions, etc.),

A. S. Ogolevets (independence – “diatonicity” – 12 sounds of the tonal system; semantics of steps; theory of modal genesis), I. V. Sposobina (study of the formative role of modal tonal functionality, systematic harmony of modes in addition to major and minor, interpretation of rhythm and meter as factors of ice formation), V. O. Berkova (systematics of a number of phenomena of ice formation). The problem of L. dedicated. works (and sections of works) by A. N. Dolzhansky, M. M. Skorik, S. M. Slonimsky, M. E. Tarakanov, H. F. Tiftikidi and others.

References: Odoevsky V. F., letter to V. F. Odoevsky to the publisher about primordial Great Russian music, in Sat: Crossing Kaliki. Sat. poems and research by P. Bessonova, h. 2, no. 5, Moscow, 1863; his own, Mirskaya song, written in eight voices with hooks with cinnabar marks, in the collection: Proceedings of the first archaeological congress in Moscow, 1869, vol. 2, M., 1871; his own, (“Russian commoner”). Fragment, 1860s, in book: B. F. Odoevsky. Musical and literary heritage, M., 1956 (includes reprints of the articles mentioned above); Razumovsky D. V., Church singing in Russia, vol. 1-3, M., 1867-69; Serov A. N., Russian folk song as a subject of science, “Musical Season”, 1869-71, the same, Izbr. articles, etc. 1, M., 1950; Sokalsky P. P., Russian folk music…, Har., 1888; Famintsyn A. S., Ancient Indochinese gamma in Asia and Europe …, St. Petersburg, 1889; Metalov V. M., Osmoglasie znamenny chant, M., 1899; Yavorsky B. L., The structure of musical speech. Materials and notes, no. 1-3, M., 1908; Kastalskiy A. D., Features of the folk-Russian musical system, M.-P., 1923, M., 1961; Rimsky-Korsakov G. M., Justification of the quarter-tone musical system, in the book: De Musica, vol. 1, L., 1925; Nikolsky A., Sounds of folk songs, in the book: Collection of works of the ethnographic section of the HYMN, vol. 1, M., 1926; Asafiev B. V., Musical form as a process, book. 1-2, M., 1930-47, L., 1971; his own, Preface. to Russian per. book: Kurt E., Fundamentals of linear counterpoint, M., 1931; his own, Glinka, M., 1947, M., 1950; Mazel L. A., Ryzhkin I. Ya., Essays on the history of theoretical musicology, vol. 1-2, M.-L., 1934-39; Tyulin Yu. N., The doctrine of harmony, vol. 1, L., 1937, M., 1966; his own, Natural and alteration modes, M., 1971; Gruber R. I., History of musical culture, vol. 1, h. 1, M., 1941; Ogolevets A. S., Introduction to modern musical thinking, M.-L., 1946; Dolzhansky A. N., On the modal basis of Shostakovich’s compositions, “SM”, 1947, No 4; Kushnarev X. S., Questions of history and theory of Armenian monodic music, L., 1958; Belyaev V. M., Comments, in the book: Jami Abdurakhman, Treatise on Music, trans. from Persian, ed. and with comments. AT. М. Belyaeva, Tash., 1960; his, Essays on the history of music of the peoples of the USSR, vol. 1-2, Moscow, 1962-63; Berkov V. O., Harmony, h. 1-3, M., 1962-1966, M., 1970; Slonimsky S. M., Prokofiev’s Symphonies, M.-L., 1964; Kholopov Yu. N., About three foreign systems of harmony, in: Music and Modernity, vol. 4, M., 1966; Tiftikidi H. F., Chromatic system, in: Musicology, vol. 3, A.-A., 1967; Skoryk M. M., Ladovaya system S. Prokofieva, K., 1969; Sposobin I. V., Lectures on the course of harmony, M., 1969; Alekseev E., On the dynamic nature of the mode, “SM”, 1969, No 11; Problems of fret, Sat. Art., M., 1972; Tarakanov M. E., New tonality in the music of the XNUMXth century, in: Problems of Musical Science, vol. 1, M., 1972; Ticket K. V., Esq. works, i.e. 1-2, M., 1971-73; Harlap M. G., Folk-Russian musical system and the problem: the origin of music, in collection: Early forms of art, M., 1972; Silenok L., Russian musician-theorist M. D. Rezvoy, “Soviet musician”, 1974, April 30; cm. also lit.

Yu. N. Kholopov