Re: Lern Steiger and my mode article

[Joshua Horowitz <horowitz...>]

Irwin,

Its certainly a temptation to want to define Mode as a collection of motif
patterns, especially since this is one aspect which is most often overlooked
when we try to define them. But to define modes solely by their motivic
collections would be difficult, because (as Israel Adler points out) the
motives overlap generously from mode to mode. So if one mode has motives
which appear in other modes, we have to be able to differentiate between
them.

In my article, I tried to widen the concept of mode (as it applies to
Klezmer music) to include such important things as sub modes, which are the
secondary modes that are used to modulate to in any one given mode or
shtayger. That concept is closer to a definition of makam, as the traditions
that use makamat include modulation tendencies in their definition.

Western classical music developed a simple terminology to include
modulation, by using 2 categories: diatonic and chromatic (later also
enharmonic). Diatonic modulations include any tonalities whose fundamental
tone is found in the scale itself, so if you have c major, a diatonic
modulation would move to any of the tonalities within C major (d,e, F, G,
a). Any modulations which go to keys outside of these would be considered
"chromatic").

The older modal systems also have patterns and categories of modulation, but
we have gotten used to defining such things as klezmer modes simply as
scales, which often blurs essential differences in them. This may only be
important in an academic discussion, but it may actually be helpful to know
the fine points of how modes work, if you are interested in exploring their
subtle distinctions. To do that you don't need nomenclature and all that
stuff, but as long as we're on the subject...

There are also other differences in the shtayger, one of which I call
"The Sub-tonic tone group"  (called Yeden  in Turkish, meaning accompanying
or helping tone), which you don't get in western definitions of tonality.
This is a  tone or tone group which is found below the low nominal tone (or
³fundamental²) but may be different in the upper octave.

So, in answer to your question, what is needed to define a mode, I would
suggest a set of criteriae which include:

1) scalar form of the tone group
2) typical incipts (beginnings) and cadences
3) common Motivic Scheme or patterns (typical contours)
4) ³Assigned² tones (tones which are typically relegated to specific motives
within the piece)
5) The mood, ethos, or gusto of the mode
6) Sub-mode modulation groups

Of the above, I think that number 6 is the one most often overlooked and
very specific to each shtayger or mode, kind of a telltale sign as to what
the mode is.

Be well, Josh


> On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Joshua Horowitz wrote:
>
>> The Lern Steiger (i.e. study mode) seems to be more a motive structure
>> or collection of motif patterns than a bonified mode or Steiger of its
>> own. The motives used in the Lern Steiger remain fairly consistent from
>> mode to mode.
>
> Dear Josh,
>
> I always understood steigers to be precisely that: collections
> of motif patterns.
>
> What else, in your opinion, is necessary to make a steiger a "bonified
> mode" ?
>
>> The original article is 63 pages, and deals exhaustively mainly with
>> klezmer modal modulation patterns.
>
> Maybe it's a good idea to put a pdf file of the full article on
> your web site. I certainly would like to read your complete
> article.
>
> Regards,
> Irwin Oppenheim
>
>

---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+