Customer Reviews

Introduction to Post-Tonal Theory (3rd Edition)

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

This is simply the best introduction to musical set theory in print, and one of the most pedagogically sound theory texts available for any topic. Straus writes exceedingly well, and his organization and pacing are excellent. This is not "watered-down Allen Forte," it is a humane spin on rather abstract musical concepts in language musicians can understand. Forte's and Perle's works are invaluable to the discipline, but their books are almost unreadable.

Straus's revised edition expands the repertoire only minimally (more could be done here), but the new exercises (particularly the composition sections) are an excellent addition. An average undergraduate class can make it through the text in a single semester with plenty of time left -- about four or five weeks -- to cover additional repertoire and topics.

Dr. O

Reviewers of such a book as Intro. to Post-Tonal Theory should know a bit about set-class theory before trying to discredit Straus's work. "A Reader"'s review (titled "Inaccurate") is itself blatantly wrong. Set [0,3,4,5,8,10,11], this reviewer proposes, does not yield prime form if one applies Straus's methods to it. What the reviewer doesn't seem to realize is that he has failed to apply the first rule of finding normal order, of finding the MINIMUM SPAN of a set, which Straus does tell readers to do. The aforementioned septachord must be put in normal order first with minimum span (that is, 0,1,2,7,8,9) before applying Straus's right-to-left rule. A review must be critical but such a mistaken reading must either be ignorance or willful malevolence, neither of which is appropriate here. "from the real world of music" is arguably a worse review, throwing up a veil of unnecessary "big words," to use the vernacular, to hide a critique based upon nothing. What abuses of terminology, what logical fallacies, and what errors does this reviewer refer to? And if Straus's book is "cliff notes", then what is the real version? I don't discredit these reviews from a difference of opinion on my part but rather I am disgusted by the ignorance present in these reviews.

Having said all that, is is no surpise that I firmly believe that Straus's text belongs at the top of a short list of anyone who wishes to pursue pitch class set theory. It is indeed designed as a text and as such is often times clearer and more practical than the Allen Forte original. He engages precisely the repertoire Forte set out to engage (the second Viennese school mainly) and supports his clear explanations with convincing musical examples and step-by-step analyses. The positive reviews here obviously outweight the astoundingly ignorant negative ones. As well, this book has the blessing of the majority of the music theory community behind it, and rightly so. This is a valuable book that deserves a place on any theorist's (or aspiring theorists's) shelves.

I like this book a lot. It is a practical, balanced, to-the-point guide. I have been composing for a long time (14+ years) but I've only been studying it full time for 3 years now, and I found that the book really helped to clarify a lot of my thinking about pitch collections, 20th century harmonies, and 20th century compositional techniques.

RE: The Prime Form debate. There are two methods for computing the prime form, the "Forte" and "Rahn" method. This book uses the "Rahn" method and is perfectly consistent throughout. While this is a minor issue, because it only affect 5 pitch class sets (of 200), perhaps it would be good to add a paragraph about the differences in a future revision to help beginniners avoid confusion.

This book is an excellent primer for the basics of twelve-tone and atonal theory. The book's biggest strength is its pedagogical approach and clarity of difficult concepts. One can attempt to learn atonal theory through Allen Forte's book (and many did), but much of his book is theoretical, not practical, causing difficulty in distilling the main topics. Fortunately Straus's book has been revised, so I hope the repertoire has been expanded a bit, to move beyond the canon composers (Bartok, Schoenberg, Berg, Webern, etc). In short, if you're looking to understand the musical materials behind atonal music, this book is a fine place to start.

This is a well-organized and thorough review of post-tonal theory. And there are great exercises, but there is NO ANSWER KEY! This was a great annoyance to me as I reviewed for an exam.

I used this book in school to get a better grasp on atonal theory, Although most of my initial confusion came from teachers using different methods of computing pitch class sets... see other reviews for arguments based on the "Rahn" Method and the "Forte" method.
If your knowledge of basic western harmony is lacking, this book isn't for you yet. But after you have a good handle on your I's IV's and V/iii's and whatnot, you'll find this book helpful and extremely approachable. I really wish it could be reprinted cheaper, as it's price will undoubtedly keep it out of the reach of some while the rest of us fight over the one tattered copy remaining in the library.

As most folks considering this book will know, Masaya Yamaguchi has done what was previously considered impossible, and listed every possible scale in his The Complete Thesaurus of Musical Scales.

What you may not know, is that Masaya uses Straus' notation throughout his astonishing Thesaurus, which includes all atonal AND tonal scales possible in any and every musical form on the planet. If you want to maximize the value of Yamaguchi in your improv or composing, Straus (or someone similar like Lateef, Coltrane, Liebman, Forte, Messiaen, Slonimsky) is a required prerequisite, because Yamaguchi does not explain in detail the source of his vectors-- and assumes you'll pick up a theory text. If you're going to anyway, why not get the one he used as the basis for his Thesaurus?

If you don't know what I'm talking about-- improv musicians and composers, and particularly "live" jazz performers who compose "on the spot" use a variety of transpositions (and of course interpretations) of scales and chords-- such as inverting Ionian, Dorian, etc. from church music. Beyond just overlapping scale patterns over chord changes, having a vast repertoire of scales, like the chess player with a vast number of possible moves, enhances the ability to both perform spontaneously and compose. Yamaguchi gives ALL the possible combinations in an A-G system. To make use of this wealth of performance and compositional potential, we first need to brush up on its foundation, and Straus is, by far, the most frequent text used to do so, whether you follow Berklee, Coltrane, Lateef, or now, Yamaguchi. This is not a cheap book, but if your goal is to greatly expand your domain of possible scale applications, it's a must have.

Highly recommended either for theory study, or practical application alongside scale compendiums like Yamaguchi.

This book is undoubtedly the best introduction to post-tonal theory available. As with all of Straus's work, the text is easy to read and comprehend. His musical examples are well chosen, and the analyses are thoughtful, insightful, and MUSICAL (note particularly his discussion of Sprechstimme in the "Nacht" analysis).

My only complaint is that the twelve-tone discussions seem a bit superficial...but it is just an introduction. The interested reader is given a large bibliography to seek out further information.

This book is well worth the purchase for any musician interested in engaging in intelligent discussion of post-tonal music, whether you are a performer (upper level undergrad, or graduate student) taking a required theory class, or if you are a theory PhD student studying for comprehensive exams (supplemented with Forte, Perle, Morris, Babbitt, etc...)

I found that this book is an excellent text and should be used in all post tonal thoery courses. It is easy to use and very informative. To quote him, this text is "Supercharged with cool stuff".

Re: "One can attempt to learn atonal theory through Allen Forte's book (and many did), but much of his book is theoretical, not practical, causing difficulty in distilling the main topics." I hope the author of this sentence when he writes "many did" means "many did attempt", not "many did learn 'atonal theory through Allen Forte's book'". Certainly that book is "not practical", but neither is it "theoretical" if we insist that music theory must say something about music. The practical alternative to reading Allen Forte's book is not to read a patronizing adulterated version of it such as "Introduction to Post-Tonal Theory", but to read a book that really knows and understands music, to read, for example, George Perle's "Serialism and Atonality" (as a reviewer below recommends).