Take the 2-minute tour ×
Musical Practice & Performance Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for musicians, students, and enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Assuming Fux's counterpoint was written in 1752, why are there some references to the modal system and none to tonality? I mean... 1752 is way beyond the end of modality! Composers already had the notion of tonality in 1700: or am I wrong? If not, why did Fux didn't reference tonality but just write about the modal system?

share|improve this question
    
If 1752 is way beyond the end of modality, why is 1970's fusion chock full of it ... :) –  Kaz Jan 27 at 19:52
    
@Kaz because hey man, it's like cool can you dig. –  BobRodes Feb 6 at 20:53
add comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 9 down vote accepted

First, Gradus ad Parnassum was completed in 1725 (not 1752), so it's a bit earlier than you think, although still in the time frame when tonality was becoming common.

Second, Fux was intentionally looking back to earlier styles of music, explicitly the music of Palestrina (who died 1594), and was, in a sense, taking a historical view even when it first published. In his introduction he even indicates that Aloysious, the teacher in the dialog, is his surrogate for Palestrina.

share|improve this answer
4  
Agreed with Dave here - functional harmony and roman numerals wouldn't really take hold for a few more decades. When Fux published, it was 25 years before JS Bach passed. Back then, people thought linearly; vertical sonorities were the result of careful voice leading and treatment of dissonance. Also keep in mind that secular music developed out of sacred, and modality held a stranglehold on music for quite a number of years. –  jjmusicnotes Jan 27 at 8:15
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.