Harmonic Analysis of the First Movement of Faust Symphony — The Opening: A Matrix of Augmented Triad

[u/Public-Locksmith-520]

Harmonic Analysis of the First Movement of Faust Symphony — The Opening: A Matrix of Augmented Triads and the Absence of a Clearly Perceptible Tonal Center — A Philosophical Perspective

While I was practicing harmonic analysis of the Romantic style, I worked on more pieces by Liszt than by any other composer. I managed to analyze and solve everything I practiced, but when I came across this opening, it genuinely intrigued me and caught my attention so much that I wanted to explore the harmonic analysis of the entire symphony—or at least the first movement. If the piece begins like this, who knows what other fascinating things might be hidden within it!

Since I am particularly interested in “systems,” I noticed what seems to be a quasi-system within this matrix of excessive augmented triads, known as the twelve-tone system. I have read Weitzmann's Regions, My Cycles, and Douthett's Dancing Cubes by Richard Cohn, Das Projekt »Dreiklang«. Natur und Technik bei Logier, Weitzmann, Wagner und Liszt by Johannes Menke, and other texts. I understood Neo-Riemannian theory, Weitzmann's theory, and Schoenberg's theory, and I saw that Kurth and Lewin had also written about this subject. And there is only one more female author left for me to read...

Without going into too much detail, the one thought that keeps running through my mind is that, within this twelve-tone system, the entire field of all tonalities exists simultaneously. I don't think there is any possibility or space to examine it from just one perspective.

This particular opening, specifically the way Liszt composed it, arranged the material, and contrapuntally maintained the linear voice leading, seems to me to be the strongest evidence that the twelve-tone system is a circular relationship in which all tonalities are present at once, simultaneously.

Could someone offer some thoughts on this? Because I find this idea absolutely astonishing.

Honestly, when something like this emerges as an absolute truth, it frustrates me, and I simply cannot accept it as such. I want to do something about it, driven by my frustration with the way everything is reduced to a circular relationship, where one thing becomes another and both become equivalent in their influence through enharmonic equivalence. I believe that enharmonicism could be used to derive a substantial system, one that could serve purposes far beyond those dictated by the Romantic style.

*I haven't yet put my ideas into practice or developed them into actual works. For now, I'm focused on gathering knowledge. Later, I would like to pursue all the questions and problems I find interesting and worthy of investigation professionally, as an established music theory researcher, after completing my doctorate in a few years...

[u/Public-Locksmith-520]

u/gottahaveajava hey, this is for you

[u/gottahaveajava → u/Public-Locksmith-520]

[u/Public-Locksmith-520](u/Public-Locksmith-520), it would seem we finally have context for your OP!

Thanks.

I think you are onto an interesting area. I mean, it is scientifically evident that the diatonic scale is a truncated version of a larger whole. If you extend out from 6 consecutive 5ths in both directions, you’ll wind up with the complete circle of 5ths joining again (never mind being a few cents out).

I’m not sure where your frustration lies, though. The fact that something is shouldn’t be a source of frustration. I suppose the frustration would come from sensing that there is a realm of physical principles that could be harnessed compositionally, but is as yet beyond our ability to easily manage.

I personally believe that if there’s a whole organizing rule set for working the whole circle instead of a 7-note subset, then we should be able to write "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star” with it.

A set of musical organizing principles should yield child-like simplicity as readily as it does giant works.

Almost all the works that explore the full circle are monumental and specialized. The Liszt is ravishing, and it has much in common with Wagner, Mahler, Strauss & Schoenberg. But it all lives in one sonic space.

Remember that theoretical complexity has led to replacement over and over throughout musical history. The beginnings of Baroque opera, simple declamation over a small set of dry chords, were a revolution of simplicity over the music of the late Renaissance, which had grown so complex that you needed to grow up practicing in the tradition to even listen to it. Late Bach was replaced by early Classical.

It’s potentially controversial to apply the same observation to the experimental impulses of 20th century classical music. It could easily be observed that the simplicity of the popular song acquired undisputed popular ascendency over it largely because classical music had once again reached the level of complexity that required specialized skills just to listen to it.

We need a ditty to ground your integrated system in elements with universal appeal.

[u/Public-Locksmith-520]

Its beautiful and perfect like a diamond, that is how I see this excerpt