Grove Counterpoint

Oxford Music Online
Grove Music Online
Counterpoint
articleurl:http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com:80/subscriber/article/grove/music/06690
Counterpoint
(fromLat.contrapunctus,fromcontrapunctum:againstnoteFr.contrepointGer.
KontrapunktIt.contrappunto).
Aterm,firstusedinthe14thcentury,todescribethecombinationofsimultaneouslysounding
musicallinesaccordingtoasystemofrules.Ithasalsobeenusedtodesignateavoiceorevenan
entirecomposition(e.g.VincenzoGalilei'sContrapuntiaduevoci,1584,orthecontrapunctiofJ.S.
Bach'sArtofFugue)devisedaccordingtotheprinciplesofcounterpoint.(SeealsoPOLYPHONY,I.)
1. Discant of the 13th and 14th centuries.

Thetheoryofcounterpoint,whichexistedbyabout1330,developedfromtheoldertheoryof
discant,butdiffersfromitinwaysthatacomparisonofthetwomakesclear.Thetechniqueof
discantoccursintwodistinctforms.Worksdealingwithintervalsuccessiontheory(Klangschritt
Lehre)merelylistpossiblesingleprogressionsofanaddedvoiceforallusualsuccessive
intervalsofthecantus,consideringonlytheconsonancesofunison,octave,5th(andoccasionally
4th)forexample:Ifthecantusascendsbya2ndandtheopposedpartbeginsattheoctave,then
theopposedpartdescendsbya3rdandforms[withthecantus]a5th,ordescendsbya7thand
coincideswiththecantus(CoussemakerS,ii,191).Generalguidelinesoncompositional
techniquearefoundonlyintheworkofFrancoandhisfollowers,apartfromtraditionalinstructions
oncontrarymotion(seeEggebrechtandZaminer,1970CoussemakerS,ii,494AnnM,v,1957,
35).Francowasclearlyconcernedtoemphasizetheconsonantordissonantqualityofsoundsin
theformulationofgeneralstatementsoncompositionaltechnique,butdidnotgobeyond
individualaspects(CSM,xviii,6973):
EverydiscantisorderedbyconsonancesEveryimperfectdissonance[major
2nd,major6th,minor7th]soundswellimmediatelybeforeaconsonanceThe
discantbeginsattheunison,octave,5th,4th,ormajororminor3rd[i.e.onanyof
theconsonances],thenproceedsinconsonancesandoccasionallymixesthem
atsuitablepointswithdissonances,sothatwhenthetenorisascending,the
discantisdescendingandviceversa.Itshouldbenotedthattenoranddiscant
occasionallyascendordescendsimultaneouslyforthesakeofthebeautyofthe
pieceandalsothatconsonancesarealwaysusedinall[rhythmic]modesat
thebeginningoftheperfectio[mensuralunit].
Anonymus2tried(c1300)toanalysetheroleofimperfectconsonancesincompositiontechnique:
Imperfect[consonances]arethemajorandminor3rd,whicharegoodintheprogressionfroma
5thtoa5thorfroma5thtoaunisonandviceversaandthemajor6th,whichisgoodbeforean
octave(CoussemakerS,i,311).
KlausJrgenSachs
2. Early note-against-note writing.

EarlycounterpointdivergesclearlyfromthetheoriesofFrancoandAnonymus2bytakingonly
twopartnoteagainstnotecompositionintoconsideration,thusignoringdissonancesand,atfirst,
notevaluesbychangingtheclassificationofthesounds,apparentlylittle,butradically,by
reclassifyingthe4th(whichwasamediumconsonanceandbecomesadissonance)andby
makingthedifferenceinqualitybetweenperfectandimperfectconsonancesthebasisofaregular
system.Textbooks,typically,listconsonances,perfectandimperfect,andproviderulesfortheir
succession.
Thesubdivisionofconsonancesalwaysleadstothecontrastbetweentheunison,5thandoctave
asperfectandthe3rdand6thasimperfect.Itisimmaterialwhethertheconsonancesaregiven
Greeknames,ashappenedparticularlyintheearlystages,orLatinnames(inotherwords,
whether3rds,forexample,weredescribedseparatelyassemiditonusandditonusorjointlyas
tertia)itisalsoimmaterialwhetherandtowhatextentintervalsgreaterthantheoctaveare
mentionedandclassified,andwhethertheperfectconsonanceswerecalledconsonantiaeand
theimperfectdissonantiae(asoccasionallyhappened).Butterminologyandthenumberofnamed
consonancesdogiveinformationaboutthetraditionsandphasesoftheory.
Thedifferenceinqualitybetweenthetwogroupsofconsonancesisparticularlyshowninthe
directionsreferringtoimportantsectionsinthecompositionortoparallelpartwriting:the
beginningandendshouldbeperfectconsonancesandthepenultimatenoteanimperfect
consonanceparallelsuccessionsofidenticalintervalsarestrictlyforbiddenwithperfect
consonancesbutemphaticallyrecommendedwithimperfectones.Thisdifferentiationisbasedon
thefact,remarkedonbyAnonymus2,thatthreeconsonancesequences(3rdunison,3rd5thand
6thoctave)haveparticularadvantages:closemelodicconnectionsthroughconjunctmotion,
independentpartwritingthroughcontrarymotion,andchangeinsoundthroughthetransitionfrom
imperfecttoperfectconsonance(which14thcenturywriterscalledstriving:requirere,tendere).
AccordingtothetheoryofMarchettodaPadova(c1318)repeatedlytakenupinthe15thand
16thcenturiesthoughwithoutbecomingthenormintheoryorpracticeoneofthetwopartswas
alsosupposedtomovebyasemitone,asinex.1.Thisalsodeterminedthebasisofcounterpoint
evenincontextswhereidealsequencesoccuronlyoccasionally.Thishappenswhenthetheory
offers,asrecommendations(mandataarbitraria),progressiontonearbynotes,contrarymotion,
andalternationbetweenimperfectandperfectconsonances.Forcombinationsthatrespectonly
onemandatumarbitrarium,thestrictprohibition(mandatumnecessarium)ofparallelsimilar
perfectconsonancesontheonehand,andthepermittedsuccessionofsimilarimperfect,
dissimilarimperfectanddissimilarperfectconsonancesontheother,arebothvalid.Therepetition
ofanote,causingobliquemotion,issometimespermittedonlyinthecantus,butmaybeusedin
eitherpart(oreveninbothsimultaneously,asarepeatednote)itisnothoweverthe
recommendednextstep.Onthebasisofthesedirections,agivencantusyieldsanoteagainst
notecomposition,inwhich15thcenturytheoristsrequiredtwoessentialqualities:first,difference
betweenthetwoparts,intheinterestsofwhichparallelprogressioninsimilarperfect
consonances,usualinpolyphonyofthe9thcenturytothe13th,wasnowforbidden(Ifoneperson
singsthesameastheotherthatdoesnotfulfiltheaimofcontrapunctusforitsaim[intentio]is
thatwhattheonesingsbedifferent[diversum]fromwhattheothersingsProsdocimusde
Beldemandis,1412CoussemakerS,iii,197)andsecond,indeterminatestructure,ensuredbythe
factthattherewerealwaysseveralpermittedconsonancestochoosefrom,andthusmany
possibleresolutionsforthepartaddedtoacantus(Contrapunctusistheindeterminatesetting
[positio]ofasinglenoteinhighorlowpositionagainstasinglenoteinanycantus.
Contrapunctusisrelatedsimply[simpliciter]andwithoutpredetermination[indeterminate]toall
settings[positiones]ofhighandlownotesinthemusicalsystemUgolinoofOrvieto,c1430
CSM,vii/2,p.4).
Ex.1Movementfromanimperfecttoaperfectconsonancewithonepartmovingbyasemitone,fromMarchettoda
Padova(c1318)
Tohearthisexamplepleaseclickhere
Musicexamplesfromcounterpointtreatisesmayillustratedifferentfeaturesofthemethodof
composition.Inex.2acontrarymotionisdominantparallelimperfectconsonancesareused
sparinglywhenonepartmovesbyleaptheothermovesbysteporhasarepetition(theadded
part,accordingtosometreatises,shouldberestrictedtotherangeofahexachord).Inex.2b,
parallelsofuptofoursimilarimperfectconsonancesarerelativelyfrequenttheyusuallyleadto
theadjacentperfectconsonance(asinintervals6,9and20)butcanalsoleadtooneormore
imperfectconsonancesofanotherkind(1415)simultaneousskipsarenotexcluded(1011,15
16),butinvolvecontrarymotionandchangeofintervaltype.
Ex.2Differingmethodsofcompositionfromtwocounterpointtreatises
Bywayofcontrastinprecontrapuntalnoteagainstnotecompositions,combinationsofunison,
5thandoctave,whereparallelsofsimilarintervalsarenotimpossible,predominateover3rds,
whichusuallyonlyserveasabridgebetweenunisonand5th(ex.3)thestillconsonant4thalso
sometimesappears,whilethe6thisrare(seetheexamplesinSachs,1974,pp.1212).
Ex.33rdsservingasabridgebetweenunisonand5th,Alleluya.Altissimus(IFnPalat.472,f.15vb)
KlausJrgenSachs
3. Treatises of the 14th and 15th centuries.

Fromthetimeoftheearliestsurvivingtextbooksoncounterpoint,thenumberoftreatiseson
compositiontechniqueincreasedmarkedlyandthetermcontrapunctusquicklycameintouse.
Thiswassurelyamatterofcauseandeffecttheexplanationisprobablytobefoundinthenovelty
ofthetechniquedesignedfornoteagainstnotecomposition.Thereareisolatedreferencestoa
contraponchamensorcontrapointamensinthebriefdiscussionofmusicalgenresandpolyphonic
practicesinPeiredeCorbiac'sProvenalTesaur(c1250),butthereisnomentionoftheword
contrapunctusinmusictheoreticalwritingsuntilitsappearanceinthenewtheoryofcomposition
about1330,sinceallknownauthorsfromJohannesdeGarlandia(c1240)toJacquesdeLige
(c1260after1330)usedthegeneraltermdiscantuswhendiscussingcompositiontechnique.
AmongtheearliestdidacticcontrapuntalworksareprobablythebriefpieceattributedtoJohannes
deMuris,Quilibetaffectans(CoussemakerS,iii,5960a),whichwaswidelyread,andthe
compilationofPetrusfraterdictusPalmaociosa,writtenc1336(Wolf,191314).PhilippedeVitry,
too,seemstohavetaughtcounterpointevenifnoversionsofthetreatisesattributedtohim(e.g.
CoussemakerS,iii,237)canberegardedasauthenticallyhisintheirsurvivingform.
Mostoftheworksoncounterpointuptothe15thcenturyareanonymous,anditisnotusually
possibletofixtheirdatesorplacesoforiginaccurately.Treatisesthathelpestablishachronology
forthedevelopmentofthetheoryincludeGoscalch(1375excerptinSachs,1974),Antoniusde
Leno(c1400CoussemakerS,iii,30728),ProsdocimusdeBeldemandis(1412CoussemakerS,
iii,1939),UgolinoofOrvieto(c1430CSMvii/2),JohannesLegrense(c1460CoussemakerS,iv,
38396),JohannesTinctoris(1477CoussemakerS,iv,76153),GuilielmusMonachus(c1480
CSM,xi)andFlorentiusdeFaxolis(between1484and1492excerptinSeay,1963,p.85).The
reliabilityofthesourcesincreasedwiththeappearanceofprintedworksoncounterpoint,by
RamosdePareia(Musicapractica,1482),NicolausBurtius(Musicesopusculum,1487),
FranchinusGaffurius(Practicamusicae,1496)andothers.
KlausJrgenSachs
4. Contrapunctus diminutus.
ThetreatiseCumnotumsit(probablymid14thcentury)containsadefinitionofcounterpointas
nothingbutasettingofnoteagainstnote(nonnisipunctumcontrapunctumponerevelnotam
contranotamponerevelfacere)andthebasisofdiscant(fundamentumdiscantus
CoussemakerS,iii,60).Discant,thenewerforminthiscase,denotesthemannerofcomposition
whosebasisiscontrapuntalnoteagainstnotecomposition.Thesecondpartofthetreatise(De
diminutionecontrapuncti)elucidatestherelationbetweenthetwotypesofcomposition:sincethe
contrapunctusthepartaddedtothetenor,inbrevesofequallengthcanbedividedinto
smallernotesinvariousways,theworklistsrhythmicalpossibilitiesofthiskindandillustratesthem
withmusicalexamples.Theexamples(22,accordingtothemostreliablesources)allhavethe
sametenor,andeachfollowsarhythmicformulatheyareallbasedonthesamenoteagainst
notecomposition,whosedegreeofdiminutionincreasessystematicallyfromexampletoexample
foreachofthefourbasicmensurations,asinex.4(thebeginningoftheexamplesfortempus
perfectumcumprolationemaioricitedinSachs,1974,p.146).Theworkillustratesthetechnique,
knownfromothertreatises,ofcreatingadiminishedversionofanaddedpart,byfillingoutthe
breveunitsorbytheinterpolationofnotes,butdoesnotmentionthedissonances(2nds,4thsand
7ths)thatthusoccur.Thelackofsuchcommentprobablydoesnotmeanthatdissonancecouldbe
usedfreelybutthatitsapplicationstilllayoutsidethecontrapuntalsystem.Referencestotheuse
ofdissonance,however,occasionallyoccurin14thandearly15thcenturycounterpointtreatises.
Ex.4Cumnotumsit
PetrusfraterdictusPalmaociosasaidthatdissonancescouldappearbriefly,bystepinascentor
descenttoaconsonance.AccordingtoAntoniusdeLeno,whoallowednoteagainstnote,two
notesagainstoneandthreenotesagainstone,themiddleofthreeshortnotesofequallength
couldbedissonant.Anotherworkallowsathirdofasemibrevetobedissonant(CoussemakerS,
iii,27)inthesocalledcantusfractibilis.Goscalch,whoapparentlyknewCumnotumsit,went
further,andproposedtodividenotesintoparts,i.e.tosingseveralnotesinthecantusinsteadof
one.Atthesametimehedemandedobservanceoftherulesofcounterpointandconfirmedthe
prohibitionofparallelperfectconsonancesforbothimmediatelyconsecutiveshorternotevalues,
andforthecontrapuntalframework.Heconsideredthathavingonlyconsonanceswasimpossible
orverydifficultandirksome,andthusassumedtheuseofdissonance.Healloweddissonance
evenatthebeginningandendofafiguralunit,ifittookuplessthanhalfthevalueofthefigure(or,
inthecaseofsyncopation,evenasmuchashalf).
Inspiteoftheevidentclosenessinmaterialandmethodofnoteagainstnoteandfigured
composition,thetwoformswerelargelyseparateintheoryandterminologyuntilTinctoris'swork
publishedin1477(see6below):mostofthetreatisesdonotmentiondiminutionordissonance,
andtherewascriticismoftheextensionofthemeaningofthewordcontrapunctuswhichalready
occasionallymeantthesettingofseveralnotesagainstone(seeCoussemakerS,iii,194CSM,
vii/2,4).
KlausJrgenSachs
5. Three-part composition in the 15th century.

Thefirstworksoncounterpointthatallowthreepartcompositionwereprobablywrittennotearlier
thanthe15thcenturytheyarenotgenuineextensionsofthetheory(aswasthecasewith
contrapunctusdiminutus)butsimplyexplanationsofhowtherulesoftwopartnoteagainstnote
compositionshouldbeappliedtoanincreasednumberofvoices.Sincetheintervalsbetween
variouspairsofpartshavetobeconsideredandcoordinatedinthreepartcomposition,the
theoriesdealwithproblemsliabletooccurwhenthenormsoftwopartcompositionareapplied.
Mostimportantly,thebasicruleofallowingonlyconsonancesinnoteagainstnotewritingmustbe
observed,butwithtwoprecautions.
First,sincetwoaddedpartscanbemutuallydissonantalthougheachmustbeconsonantwiththe
tenor,thuscorrespondingtothenormsoftwopartcomposition,thebookswarnagainstthe2nd
createdbetweentwoaddedpartsrespectivelya5thanda6thabovethetenor(CoussemakerS,iii,
93),the9thresultingfrom5thssimultaneouslyaboveandbelowatenor,andsimilarcombinations
(seeSachs,1974,p.127).Second,becausetwoaddedparts,eachconsonantwiththetenor,often
forma4th,whichintwopartnoteagainstnotecompositionhastobeavoidedasadissonance,
treatisesindicatethepossibilityofusingthe4thinthreepartnoteagainstnotecompositionas
longasitremainshidden(Gaffurius,iii,6)bynotinvolvingthebottompart(CSM,xxii/2,p.27).
Sometextslistthepossiblecomplementarynotesforthecontratenoraswellasalltheusual
consonancesoftenoranddiscant(CoussemakerS,iii,935,4656).Thisclumsymethod,which
inthe16thcenturyevenstretchedtoafourthvoice,showsthatgeneralprinciplesofcomposition
hadhardlybeenformulated.Warningsagainstunisonandoctaveasequalorequivalent
consonancesbetweentheaddedpartsarerare(CoussemakerS,iii,92),butshowthateventhen
therewasapreferenceforcompletesounds.
Therulesforthesequenceofconsonancesintwopartcompositionremainedvalidforan
increasednumberofparts.Theorywas,however,notconsistentabouttheprohibitionofparallel
5ths.Thepermittingof4thswasbasedontheirincidentalcreation(betweenaddedvoices)and
thiscoveredparallel4thsaswell(althoughtheseareseldommentioned,andonlyinthe
techniqueofFAUXBOURDONCSM,xxii/2,p.27CSM,xi,39Gaffurius,iii,5).Fromthereitwould
havebeenasmallsteptoconcedetheanalogousparallel5ths,whichcouldbeexplainedas
causedbytheinversionofaddedparts.Occasionallytheywereindeedpermitted(CoussemakerS,
iii,466CSM,xi,423),andthatmayjustifyphrasessuchastheoneinex.5.Butothertextsforbid
parallel5ths(CSM,xxii/2,pp.1478Sachs,1974,p.131)thislatterpositiongainedacceptance
probablybecauseadifferencebetweenprimaryandsecondarycomposition,although
theoreticallyusefulforchordconstruction,wassubordinatetothegeneralcompositionalviewpoint
whererulesofprogressionwereconcerned.
Ex.5Parallel5thspossiblypermittedbyanalogytofauxbourdontechnique,PierredeLaRue:MissadeBeata
Virgine
Standardsforthemelodicstructureoftheindividualpartsvariedintheirstrictness:discantand
tenorshouldavoidleapsof6thsand7thswhilethecontratenorwasallowednotonlythesebut
evensometimesaleapofa9th.Thespecialcharacterofthecontratenorisbasedontheconcept
ofthesuccessivecompositionofpartscustomaryinthe15thcentury,forwhichBurtius(ii,5)gave
twopossibilities:firstcantus(supranus),thentenor,andlastlycontratenorfirsttenor(usuallyasa
givencantusplanus),thensuperius,andlastlycontratenor.
Thecontratenor,whichisthusaddedtoadiscantandtenorframework,wasinthefirstinstancea
filler(proreplecionesonorumseuvocumSachs,1974,p.131).Theaddedcharacterofthe
contratenorisalsotobeseeninthetypicalendings(clausulas,conclusiones)thattheoristshad
fixedforthepartssinceabout1500.Theformulaefordiscantandtenorreachthefinalnote
(ultima)ascendingordescendingbysteptoproducethe6thoctaveprogression(ex.6ac).The
contratenor,ontheotherhand,normallya5thbelowthetenoronthepenultimatenote,movesto
oneofthepossibleperfectlyconsonantfinalnotes,forminganoctaveleap(ex.6a),4thleap
(ex.6b),orfalling5th(ex.6c)cadence.Onlywhenthetenorcadencesbydescendingasemitone
tomidoesthecontratenor,inordertoavoidadiminished5th,takethe3rdbelowthetenoronthe
penultimateintervalandcloseonthe5thbelow(ex.6d).Theantepenultimateinterval,which
contemporaryexamplesalsoinclude,varieswithincertainlimits.
Ex.6Formulaeforstepwisediscantandtenorprogressionstothefinalnote,JohannesCochlaeus:Tetrachordum
musices(Nuremberg,1511,f.F)
Aparticular15thcenturythreeparttechniqueisfoundinthosecompositionswheretwoparts
constantlyruninsimilarimperfectconsonancesbetweenthefirstandlastnote,whileathird,
usuallythecontratenor,hascomplementarynotesoralsotakespartintheparallelprogression.
GuilielmusMonachusdescribedandprovidedexamplesofsuchpatterns(seeSachs,1974,
pp.132ff):withparallel3rds(ex.7a,b),and6ths(ex.7c,d),wherethecontratenoreitheralternates
betweentheunisonand5th(ex.7a,c),orbetweenthelower5thandlower3rd(ex.7b,d)with
parallel10ths,betweenwhichthereisamiddlevoice,eitherwritteninparallel6thsor5ths(ex.7e),
orwhichprogresseslikeacantusfirmusinfairlylongnotevalues(ex.7f)orwithsimultaneous
parallel3rdsand6ths(ex.7g).Thesepatterns,whichconsiderablysimplifytheconstructionof
threeparttexture,haveadvantagesfortextbookpurposesandforpracticeinimprovisation,but
havelittlevalueforcomposition.
Ex.7Patternsinwhichtwopartsruninsimilarimperfectconsonanceswhileathirdhascomplementarynotes,from
GuilielmusMonachus(c1480)
(b)Thesamestichron,withembellishmentsbyKampanes,beautifiedbyKoukouzeles(ETMSsc1584,f.123,(c)
Thesamestichron,withembellishmentsbyKampanes,beautifiedbyXenosKorones(MSsc1584,f.126v)
KlausJrgenSachs
6. Tinctoris.
Themosttightlyknit,comprehensiveandimportant14thor15thcenturytreatiseoncounterpoint
isTinctoris'sLiberdeartecontrapuncti(1477).Counterpointisheredescribedasrestrainedand
thoughtoutpolyphoniccompositioncreatedbysettingonesoundagainstanother(moderatusac
rationabilisconcentusperpositionemuniusvociscontraaliameffectusCSM,xxii,2,p.14).It
dividesintocontrapunctussimplex(noteagainstnote)anddiminutus(severalnotes,ofeither
equalorvaryinglength,againstone),andcanbeextemporized(mente)orwrittendown(scripto).
ButTinctoriscalledtheimprovisedformstraightforward(absolute)counterpoint(orsuperlibrum
cantare),andthewrittenformresfactaorcantuscompositus(CSM,xxii/2,pp.105ff).This
terminologyunknownbeforeTinctorisandusedafterwardsonlywithreferencetohimshould
notbetakentoimplythattheaimofthetheoryofcounterpointwasimprovisation.Tinctorisseems
tohavewantedtoemphasizesomethingelse:that,particularlyincompositionformorethantwo
voices,theresultofanimprovisationrelatingseveralpartscontrapuntallytoagiventenor(CSM,
xxii/2,p.110)differsfromcarefullyplannedcompositiontheinevitablelackofstrictnessin
improvisationisaconcession,nottheaimofcounterpoint.
InthefirstpartofhistreatiseTinctorisgaveabasicdescriptionoftheconsonancesandtheir
relationsincontrapunctussimplex.Thetenorandtheaddedpartbothprogresseitherbystep,or
inleapsofa3rd,aperfect4thandaperfect5th.Thesecondpartisasurveyofthedissonances
andtheirsystematicapplicationincontrapunctusdiminutus.
AccordingtoTinctoris,thecorrectuseofadissonancedependsonitsrhythmicandmelodic
position.Theyardstickfortherhythmicpositionofadissonanceisthenotevaluedeterminingthe
basicmovementofamusicalpiece,whichTinctoriscalledmensuraedirectio(ornota,secundum
quamcantusmensuraturCSM,xxii/2,pp.12438)AdamofFuldacalledthisvalue,actingasa
pulseorbeat,tactus(1490GerbertS,iii,362),and16thcenturyItaliantheorycalleditbattuta.In
prolatiomaior(ex.8,bars17)itistheminim(transcribedasacrotchet),inprolatiominor(bars9
11)thesemibreve(transcribedasaminim),andinproportionstheequivalentofthosevalues.
Tinctorisusedthefactthatbothvaluesaredivisiblebytwointherespectivemensurationsto
formulatethreebasicrulesfortherhythmicvaluesofdissonances(ex.9).
Ex.8Examplesofthecorrectuseofdissonance,accordingtorhythmicandmelodicposition,JohannesTinctoris:
Salvemartyrvirgoque
Ex.9Tinctorissfundamentalrulesfordissonances
First,ifthefirstpartofamensuraedirectio()orthebeginningofthefirstandsecondparts()is
consonant,adissonanceofequalandsmallervaluecanfollow.Thisrulecoversunstressed
dissonances,whosemaximumlengthcorrespondstotheconsonantpartofamensuraedirectio.
Unstresseddissonancescanoccuranywhereinthecomposition,butstresseddissonances(i.e.
thosefallingonthebeginningofamensuraedirectio,whichappearonlyaspreparedsuspensions
resolvedbystepwisedescent)areforTinctorisalwaysdesignedtoprepareforanimmediately
followingfinalsound(perfectioorconclusio).Thisisusuallyrestrictedtoperfectconsonances,
unlessitconcludesaninternalsectionandsimultaneouslyopensacontinuation(asinex.8where
Fappearsinparentheses).Becausesyncopateddissonancesarethusdependentonacadence,
Tinctoris'sotherrulesarebothrelatedtopropertiesofthepenultimatenoteinaphraseofthe
tenor.
Second,wherethereisapenultimatenoteequalinvaluetotwomensuraedirectio,consisting
either()ofasinglenoteor()oftwonotesidenticalinpitchandlength,thefirstpartofthefirst
mensuranearlyalwayshasadissonancesetagainstit.Third,ifthepenultimateisequalinvalue
toonemensuraedirectio,thenthefirstpart()canbedissonant,or,whenprecededbystepwise
descendingnotesofequalvalue(),thefirstpartofeachnotecanbedissonant(ex.9).Since
Tinctorisformulatedrulesofdissonanceaccordingtothegreatestpermissiblevalueineachcase,
itisnotsurprisingtofindthattherhythmicallyshortformulaeofprolatiomaioralsooccurinprolatio
minor(inparenthesesinex.8).
Asregardsmelodicposition,Tinctorisconfirmedthateachdissonanceisprecededbyan
adjacent(stepwise)consonance,andthefollowingnotewillbea2ndorveryrarelya3rdaway
(ex.8,bar4).Whenadissonanceisintroducedandleftbystep,oneshouldnotreturntothe
startingnoteunlessthedissonanceissoshortthatonecanhardlyhearit(CSM,xxii/2,p.141)
thus,inTinctorissexamplesthenotacambiatausuallyappearsasthefusa,whilethepassing
notesarealsominimsandsemiminims.Theleapofa3rdfromadissonanceislessrarein
Tinctoris'sexamples,andin15thcenturymusicingeneral,thanhisbooksuggests,anditalso
occursdescendingfromasyncopateddissonance.Occasionallytheleapofa4thalsooccursafter
adissonance,butusuallyitisasubstituteforacambiata(ex.8,bar1:leaptothe3rdabove
insteadofareturntothepitchoftheprecedingnote,whichappearsinanotherpart).Theeight
generalrulesofthethirdpartofTinctoris'streatiseofferbothtraditionalnorms(butoftenmodified
forcompositioninmorethantwoparts)andmoregeneralrecommendationsaboutthewider
contextofcomposition(itsstructureandvarietas)theyareneitherasconcretenorasimportantas
thedissonancerules,however,whichforthefirsttimemakepossibleanunderstandingofthe
period'scompositionaltechniques.
KlausJrgenSachs
7. Composition in four or more parts.

Theacceptanceintotheoryoffourpartnoteagainstnotecompositionwasanotherextensionof
contrapuntalapportionment:intervalsbetweendiscantandtenorwerefilledoutbytheadditionof
twoparts.Thebottomparttakesprecedence,sinceitmustavoidtheformationof4ths(while
makingthempossiblebetweenotherpartsbysupplyinga3rdora5th),anditissometimesmore
preciselydetermined(e.g.thepenultimatenoteisusuallya5thbelowthetenor).Thelistsand
tablescustomarysinceAaron(1523),whoenumeratedpossiblefourpartnoteformations,usually
followtheorderdiscanttenor,bass,altobuttheyillustrateonlytheprocessofcontrapuntal
dispositionoftheindividualchord.Theoldmethodofworkingoutthepartsinsuccessionfellinto
disuseduringthe16thcenturyasAaronconfirmed,themoderniconsideredallthevoices
simultaneously,thusimprovingconsonanceformationandpartwriting,andavoiding
unsatisfactoryunisons,restsorleaps.Thecatalogueofchordsstrictlyavoidssecondary
dissonancesand4thsinthebottompart,ofcourse,andfavourscompleteformations(inthesense
offulltriads).
AsearlyasCochlaeus(14791552)thereareexamplesshowingthetypicalconcludingformulae
oftheparts(seeex.6),includingthequartavox(altus)theyshowtheinterchangeabilityofthe
formulaebetweentheparts(ex.10).Ingeneral,fourwasthemaximumnumberofvoicesin16th
centurycontrapuntaltheoryandfourpartwritingwasthehighestformofcompositionaltechnique
illustratedbyexamplesoffiguralmusic.Gaffuriusmentionedthecreationofafifthpartaccording
totherulesofcounterpoint(iii,11),andTinctorisuseditinanexample(CSM,xxii/2,pp.107ff).
FlorentiusdeFaxoliscontrastedthetwopartcounterpointofthevetereswiththecompositionof
themoderniforthreetosixormoreparts,whichhedescribedascomposition,i.e.thecontrapuntal
method,extendedtoseveralvoices(Seay,1963,p.87).Eventhoughwritersdiscussedinstances
ofgoingbeyondfourpartcomposition,theydidnotdeducefromthemanynewaspectsoftheory.
Ex.10Theinterchangeabilityofconcludingformualebetweenparts,Cochlaeus(c1504)
KlausJrgenSachs
8. 16th-century counterpoint.
Thedevelopmentofcontrapuntaltheoryinthe16thcenturyconsisted,first,ofadrawingtogether
ofcontrapunctussimplex,contrapunctusdiminutusandcompositionformorethantwovoices,
oftenstillseparateinthe15thcenturysecond,anexpansionofmatterstreatedtoinclude,
particularly,themodes,techniquesofimitationandinversion,andtherelationbetweentextand
musicandthird,improved,morepreciserulesfortheuseofdissonance.Thisdevelopment
reacheditspeakinthethirdbookandpartofthefourthofZarlino'sLeistitutioniharmoniche
(1558),themostcomprehensiveandinfluential16thcenturyworkoncounterpoint.Itcontainsthe
bestandmostrefinedanalysisofthecompositiontechniqueusedinsacredmusic,particularlyat
thetimeofWillaert,Zarlino'steacheranditsurpassesWillaert'sotherpupilNicolaVicentino's
ingenious,somewhatearlierbutinmanyrespectsverysimilarL'anticamusicaridottaalla
modernaprattica(1555),bothinclarityandindetail.Almostallthemany,usuallyprinted,16th
centuryworksoncounterpointrelatetotheprimapratticastyle.Thefirsttwoattemptsto
incorporateinnovationsfromsecularvocalmusicintothetheorywerethusallthemore
pioneering:Vicentinousedchromaticmadrigalsasexamplesandrecognizedliberties(in
progression,harmonyandmode)justifiedbytextmeaningortheaffectofthewordsandGalilei
discussedanddefendedfreerusesofdissonance.
KlausJrgenSachs
9. Zarlino and aspects of dissonance treatment.

TheartedelcontrapuntoasthetheoryofpolyphoniccompositionwasforZarlinothecentreof
musicapraticaandatthesametimethemostcomprehensiveamalgamofthemesinallmusic
theory.Zarlinonotonlyconsideredindetailalltraditionalaspectsofcounterpointbutalsotriedto
defineadditionalrequirementsandconditionsofpolyphoniccomposition.Thesoggetto,or
thematicsubject,iscomposition'spointofdeparture,withoutwhichonecancreatenothing(iii,
26),andwhichcanconsistofagivenornewlycreatedcantusfirmus,cantusfiguratusoreven
severalimitativeparts.Thesoggettoinfluencesthechoiceofchurchmode,andthatinturnaffects
thecoordinationofparts.Themodeofthetenor,whichdeterminesthetonalityofthecomposition,
isusuallysharedbythesopranoinfourpartcomposition,whilethebassandaltotakeitoverwith
changedcompass(plagalinsteadofauthentic,orviceversa)andthiscorrespondstoa
differenceofalmostanoctavebetweentherangesofthetwopairsofparts(illustratedinex.11on
thebasisofthecombinationofsoprano,alto,tenorandbassclefsfrequentinZarlino).
Ex.11
Therestrictionsonmodeandcompassaffectimitativetechnique,harmonicstructureandcadence
formation.Zarlinodividedupthepossibilitiesforimitationaccordingtowhethertheleading
(guida)andfollowing(conseguente)partshaveequalordifferingintervalpatterns.Theformerhe
calledfuga(whoseentriescouldbeattheoctave,5th,4thandunison),thelatterimitatione.Both
fugaandimitationecouldfollowthecanonstrictly(aslegata)ormovefreely(assciolta)inits
continuation,andtakeupeithersomeoralloftheparts(iii,545).
Theprincipleofharmonywastocreateconsonancesbycombining3rdand5th(or6th),ortheir
equivalentsinotheroctaves,tomakeaharmoniaperfetta,or,inmodernterms,atriad.Zarlino
consideredthetriadwithamajor3rdmoreperfectthanthatwithaminor3rd,anddeclaredthat,
whilesuccessionsofmanytriadswithmajor3rdswereharmless,thosewithminor3rdshada
verymelancholyeffect(iii,31).
Eachmodehaditsownfinalnotesforthenormalcadences(iv,18ff).Thebreakingupofa
compositionbycadenceswhich,likethefullstopsinasentence,createdrestingpointsand
markedoffthesense,wasanimportantpartofthelayout(iii,51).Thecadences,whichnormally
usedsyncopateddissonances,separatedsectionsofthetextfromoneanotherandmadepossible
musicalvarietyandchangeinthesuccessivepartsofacompositiontheycould,however,alsobe
deliberatelyavoided(fuggirlecadenze)infavourofalargercontextifonepartavoidedbyaleap
oraresttheexpected(perfect)consonance(asindicatedinex.12a).
Ex.12Examplesofdissonancetreatment,fromGioseffoZarlino:Leistitutioniharmoniche
Zarlino'steachingwasaimedatfourpartcomposition,whichcontainedallperfectionofharmony.
ThisconceptofperfectionexplainswhyZarlinotriedtodescribethecharactersofthepartsby
comparisonwiththefourelements:thebass,astheearth,wasthedeepestvoice,oftenslow
moving,andcarriedtheharmonythetenorwastheequivalentofwater(itsurroundedthebass
andruledthecompositionasregardsthecombinationofmodes)thealtowastheair,and
mediatedbetweentenorandsoprano(fire),inwhoseglowitshonethesoprano,asthehighest,
moststirringandmostpowerfulvoice,waslikethelifegivingfireofthesun(iii,58).
Zarlinorequiredthatthemusicshouldsuitthecharacterofthewords,andrelatedthisproblemto
theorderingofmodesandtoparticularaffects(iv,32).Fortextunderlayhemadeasetofrules
whichmaybesummarizedasfollows.Thelengthofasyllableshallbereflectedinthe
correspondingnotevalueorvalues.Noteswiththeirownsyllableinclude,always,thefirstandlast
noteofapieceorasectionandthefirstnoteofeveryligature,andusuallyeverynontiednoteof
greatervaluethanasemiminimorcrotchet(exceptionallyasemiminim,afteradottedminim),but
nevernotesofsmallervaluethanasemiminim,orthedotafteranote.Achangeofsyllablecan
normallyoccuronlyafternotesofvaluelargerthanasemiminim,exceptthatitmayfollowa
semiminimafteradottedminim.Repetitionofwordsispermittedincantusfiguratus(butnotin
cantusfirmus),aslongastherepetitionsconsistofmeaningfulphrases,notjustindividualwords
orsyllables(iv,33).
Zarlino'srulesfordissonancemostlyusethesimplestformsofexercise,inwhichtwominims,four
semiminimsoraminimandtwosemiminimsintheaddedparteachsoundagainstonesemibreve
ofthesoggetto,andalsoconsiderthesuspension(seeex.13).First,sincetwominimsoccuron
thedownbeat(battere)andtheupbeat(levare)ofthesemibrevetactus(battuta),andare
correspondinglyprominent,bothshallbeconsonantunstressednotesmaybedissonantonlyin
stepwiseascendingordescendingsequencesofminims.Second,thefirstandthirdsemiminimin
agroupoffourmustlikewisebeconsonant,whilethesecondandfourthmaybedissonantin
stepwiseprogression.Third,thefirstoftwosemiminimsmaybedissonantwheretheyboth
descendbystepafterastressedminim(orasyncopatedsemibreve)Zarlino'sexample(ex.12b)
indicatesthatthislicenceisbasedontheelementarycharacterofthethreenotemelodicformula,
which,dependingonthefollowingnote,eitherfillsadescending4th(x)orembellishesa2nd(y),
forbothconsonant(C)andsyncopateddissonant(S)usesarenormal.Fourth,fornormal
suspensions,Zarlinorequiredconsonantpreparationandstepwisedescendingresolution,which
heillustratedbydecorativefigureswithnoterepetition(whichJeppesencalledPortamentsee
ex.12catP)andpairedfuse(quavers).Healsodiscussedspecialcasesinparticularhe
permittedpreparationbya4thabovethelowerpart(iii,61Jeppesen,quartaconsonans)and
undersomecircumstancestheirregularresolutionsof2ndintounisonandof4thintothe
diminished5th(iii,42).
Ex.13
Zarlino'sdirectionsontherhythmicstructureofthecompositionandofindividualpartsarealso
instructive.Thebeginningmustalwaysbeonthedownbeat.Ifapartenteredlater,itshouldbe
afteratleastaminimpause(oftenwithasyncopatedsemibreve).Therhythmicmovementshould
notbetoofastatfirstsothatitcouldgraduallyspeedupitwasbestfortheaccelerationtobe
achievedbytransitiontothenextsmallernotevalue.Theintroductionofsemiminimsaftera
semibreveshouldcoincidewiththelevare,notthebattere(iii,45ex.13b).Intwopartcomposition
withasoggettoinsemibrevesZarlinomadeastrictdistinctionbetweentwopositionsofthedotted
minimandsemiminimgroup:heusedthestressedpositiononlyatthebeginning(ex.13c,),
whiletheunstressedpositionisusedbothinthemiddleofthepieceand,afterarest,atthe
beginning().
ThemanydetailsoncompositiontechniquementionedbyZarlinoareessentialforthe
examinationofprimapraticaworksbuttheyarenotquitecomplete.Twofiguresshouldbe
mentioned,eachofwhichcontainsacharacteristicfreedominthetreatmentofdissonance,which
inmodernterminologyiswithconfusingambiguitycalledcambiata.
Thefirstoftheseisafivenotegroupconsistingoffoursemiminimsdescendingbystep,the
secondandthirdofwhicharedissonant,followedbyastepupwards.Thisformulaisusuallypart
ofacadenceandgoeswiththepreparationforasuspension.Whatisprobablytheoldest
descriptionofthisusage,byG.M.Artusi(L'artedelcontraponto,i,1586seeex.14a),stressesits
verygoodeffect.ItisunlikelythatStephanoVanneowasreferringtothiswhenheprescribedthe
consonanceofthefirstandlastoffoursemiminimsasthenorm(Recanetumdemusicaaurea,
1533).Berardicalledtheirregularlydissonantthirdnoteacambiata(Miscellaneamusicale,
1689),andJeppesentermeditarelativelystressedpassingdissonance.
Ex.14TwotreatmentsofdissonancenotcataloguedbyZarlino
Thesecondconsists,mostly,offournotes:anunstressedsemiminimdissonanceleapingdownto
thelower3rdtheupper2ndprecedesitandusuallyfollowstheleapinordertobalanceitout.It
appearedinvarioustextbookexamples(ofteninTinctorisex.14bisfromPontio,Ragionamentodi
musica,1588),butthereisnoknowndescriptionoftheusagein16thcenturytreatises.Popularity
andfreedomindissonancetreatmentseemtobebasedonthegoodstyleofitsmelodicoutline,as
intheformulashowninex.14b:theascendingformisrare,butthedescendingformoccursinboth
dissonant(theprogressionisusually875)andconsonant(653ex.14c)contexts,andcan
evenappear,rhythmicallyextendedandmetricallydisplaced,inapartthatcontinueswiththe
resolutionofasuspension(ex.14b,atbrokenbracket).Fux(GradusadParnassum,1725),
Jeppesenandotherscalledthesemiminimirregularlyleapingfromadissonancecambiata
Merrittdescribeditasachangingnotegroup.(Seealso13below.)
KlausJrgenSachs
10. Galilei and his innovations, 158791.

Galilei'streatisescontainthefirstsystematicattempttoaccommodatethetheoryofcounterpointto
therecentinnovationsincompositiontechnique,attributedparticularlytoCiprianodeRoreand
proclaimedbyMonteverdiin1605asthehallmarksofsecondapratica.Theseinnovationsarein
effectlibertiesindissonancetreatmentandarebasedontheviewthatdissonancesarenotonly
passingformations,dependentonconsonance,butthemselvescarrymusicalexpression.Galilei
particularlyenrichedcompositiontheorybyallowingthefollowingmeansofmakingdissonances
moreurgent,sharperandmoresurprising(seePalisca,1956,andRempp,1980).
First,inaconjunctsequenceoffoursemiminims,two(apartfromtheformsinexx.13aandex.14a)
canbedissonantinanyposition,andoccasionallythreecanbeconsecutivelydissonant(ex.15a,
b).Second,suspensions,apartfromtheformsinexx.9andex.13a,canberesolvedbyleaptoa
consonance(ex.15c),byprogressiontoanewdissonance(ex.15d),byascenttoaconsonance
(ex.15e)and,apartfromtheforminex.14b,simultaneouslywithachromaticallyprogressing
addedpart(ex.15f)theycanoccurseveralatonce(ex.15g).Third,dissonancescanalso
sometimesoccurinthestressedpositionwithoutsyncopatedpreparationifaregularresolution
follows(ex.15h,i).
Ex.15VincenzoGalileisinnovationsinthetreatmentofdissonances(158791)
KlausJrgenSachs
11. 16thcentury double counterpoint.

Withinthecontextoftheirimitativeandcanonictechniques,VicentinoandZarlinoalsodiscussed
thesystematictranspositionofpartsincompositiontootherkeys,whichtheycalledcontrapunto
doppio(Vicentinoalsousedthetermcompositionedoppia,iv,34).Theythusgaveoutforthefirst
timeamethod(considerablyolder,nodoubt)ofproducingespeciallyartificialformsof
counterpoint(Zarlino,iii,56).Thistechniquerequiresanunderstandingoftheharmoniesand
progressionsthatcanoccurinvariousformsofcomposition.Theknowledgeoftherespective
complementaryintervalsisfundamental:forharmonicintervalsofthesamekindinthebasic
(Zarlino:principale)andintheinvertedversion(replica)alwayscomplementeachothertomake
theinversioninterval.Initssimplestform,anoctaveexchangeoftheupperandthelowerpart,
theintervals3rdand6th(imperfectconsonances),2ndand7th(dissonances)andtheunisonand
octave(bothperfect)arepairedcomplementaryintervals.Thiskindofcounterpointisthusmuch
themostproductiveandneedsnospecialtheory.Thepossibilitiesoftranspositionatthe12thand
10tharemorelimitedbutcanalsowellbeusedZarlinoespeciallyusedthem,evenwithinthe
samepiece(seeex.16).Thecomplementaryintervalsfordoublecounterpointatthe12thand10th
areeasilyderivedbyensuringthatthepairsoffiguresadduprespectivelyto13and11(thusa3rd
anda10th,forexample,willformdoublecounterpointatthe12th).
Itisthuspossibletodeducethecontrapuntalconditionsforex.16a,whichmaybeinvertedin
eitherway:theconsonancesofunison,3rd,5th,octaveand10th(and12th)remainconsonantin
ordertoavoidunacceptableparallelsthepiecemustprogressincontrarymotionorleap
consonantlyinobliquemotionpassingdissonancesarepossible,butnotsuspensions.Asa
furtherformtheauthorsalsotaughtthetranspositionofbothpartsininversion(ex.16d).Inthis
caseallthechangesinintervaloftheprincipaleremainintactinthereplica.Therestrictionon
compositiontechniqueconsistsinthefactthatmelodicformulaethatarepersuasiveonlyinone
direction(ascendingordescending)aretobeavoided.
Ex.16Thetranspositionofpartsincontrapuntodoppio,fromZarlino(iii,56)
KlausJrgenSachs
12. The term counterpoint after 1600.

Counterpointhasbeenusedtoconveydifferentmeaningsinliteratureonmusicandmusictheory
fromthe17thcenturytothe20th.Theenumerationofthesemeaningsisessentialifconfusionisto
beavoided.First,theconceptofcounterpointhasbeenequatedwiththeartofstrictcomposition
(J.P.Kirnberger,17719),thusbeingusedtodescriberegulatedpartwritingregardlessof
whetherthestyleispolyphonicorhomophonic(counterpointisatechnicalcategory,polyphony
astylisticconcept).Second,morenarrowly,counterpointhasbeentakentorefertothetechnique
ofpolyphonic,asdistinctfromhomophonic,writing.Third,stillmorenarrowly,theconceptof
counterpointhasbeenconfinedtothetechniqueofvocalpolyphonybefore1600(andinaddition
Bach'sinstrumentalpolyphony).Fourth,anumberof20thcenturytheoristshaveproposeda
distinctionbetweenpolyphony,thecombiningofequalvoices,andcounterpoint,atypeofwriting
inwhichthevoicesarebroughtintoreliefagainsteachotherfunctionallyandbyvirtueoftheir
relativeimportance.Generally,however,polyphonyhasbeenusedtorefertomattersofstyleor
aesthetics,andcounterpointtorefertomattersoftechnique:polyphonyisanend,counterpointa
means.
Theassumptionthatthetheoryofcounterpointdealswiththehorizontalandthatofharmonywith
theverticaldimensionofmusicisastrivialasitismisleading.Inthestudyofharmony,itisnotjust
thestructureofchordsbutalsotheirprogressionsthatmustbedealtwithandsimilarly,inthe
theoryofcounterpointitisaquestionnotonlyofmelodicpartwritingbutalsoofthechordsformed
bytheparts.Second,thestylisticaimsofcounterpointwhicharedirectedtothesimultaneous
deploymentofcharacteristicmelodicpartsshouldbedistinguishedfromthetechnicalproblems
acomposermustsolveinordertorealizetheseaims,aboveallintheregulationofsimultaneities
(joiningconsonancestogether,manipulatingdissonances).Itisthetechnicalrulesratherthanthe
stylisticmaximsthatprimarilyconstitutethesubjectforstudy.(Aguidetocontrapuntalor
polyphonicstyle,suchasthatofKurth,1917,isnottobeconfusedwithaworkoftechnical
instruction.)
Thehistorians'ideathatanepochofcounterpointcanbeidentifiedasdistinctfromanepochof
harmony,withtheyear1600representingthedividinglinebetweenthetwo,cameaboutthrough
lackofconceptualclarity.Ifharmonyisunderstoodasreferringtoaregulatedjoiningtogetherof
simultaneitiesandthereisnothingtojustifytherestrictionoftheconceptofharmonysimplyto
tonal,chordalharmonythenmusicbefore1600alsobearsaharmonicimprint,evenifofa
differentkindfromthatoflatermusic.Kurth'sassertionthatearlycounterpointwasbasedonmere
intervalliccompatibility,andhencethatthetechniqueofjoiningtogethersimultaneitiesfulfilled
onlythenegativeaimofavoidingperturbationsinthelinearexpositionandthusofavoiding
obtrusivesequencesofconsonancesorconspicuousdissonances,ismistaken:itiscontradicted
bythefactthattheprogressions(incontrarymotion)fromthemajor6thtotheoctave,fromthe
major3rdtothe5th,andfromtheminor3rdtotheunison,werereckonedtobeespeciallyclear
andcompelling,andwerethusunderstood(comparablywiththeprogressionfromthechordofthe
dominant7thtothetonictriadintonalharmony)asharmonicphenomena.Harmonybefore1600
differsfundamentallyfromthatoflatertimes:earlierharmonyproceededfromtwonoteintervals
andnotfromthreeandfournotechords(athreenotesimultaneitywasconsideredasecondary
combinationofintervalsratherthanaprimaryentityinitself)andtonalitywasshownlessby
chordalsequencesthanbymelodicformulae.
Kurth'shypothesisthatthelinearpolyphonicdeploymentofmelodicpartswasinhibitedbytonal
harmonyisnotwhollyerroneous,butadistortionofthetruth.Aestheticallyitmaybecorrect,inthe
caseofnarrowlyrestrictedmusicalperception,tosaythatattentionisdirectedeithertothe
phenomenonofharmonyandsonorityortothatofmelodyandpolyphonyandnodoubtmany
composershavedrawntheconclusionthatinorderformusictoremainintherealmofthe
comprehensibleeitherharmonyorcounterpointmustcometothefore.Butstrictlyspeakingthe
contraryistrue:thefactthatchordprogressionsconstitutemusicalcontinuityand
comprehensibilityfreesthepartwritingfromthenecessitytotakeaccountofaspectsthatwouldbe
indispensableincompositionconsistingofintervalsequences.Thustheharmonicandtonalbasis
offreestyleisnottechnicallyanimpedimenttolinearitybutaprerequisitefortheunrestricted
deploymentofthemelodicinmusic.BachtoocontrarytoKurth'sinterpretationofhis
simultaneitiesasmereresultantsconceivedharmonictonalityasasupportformelodiclinearity.
CarlDahlhaus
13. Theory after 1700.

Counterpointtheory,whichuntilthe17thcenturywastheonlykindofinstructionincomposition,
hashadtoshareitsdominantpositionwithharmonytheorysincethe18thcenturyandtherelation
betweenthetwodisciplineshasbecomeincreasinglycomplicated.Freecompositionappearsin
theworkofmanytheoristsaspracticalharmonyandintheworkofothers,bycontrast,as
licentiouscounterpointitispossibleontheonehandtoconceiveofthe(theoretical)studyof
harmonytheawarenessoftheharmonicsignificanceofnotesasaprerequisiteforstrict
writing,andontheothertoconceiveofstrictwritingthefoundationonwhichfreecompositionas
asetofpermitteddeparturesisbuiltasaprerequisiteforthe(practical)studyofharmony.
Asadidacticdiscipline,counterpointhasbeenjustifiedbothspeculativelyandpragmatically.Fux
andPadreMartiniwereconvincedthatthenormsofstrictcounterpointwerefoundedinthevery
natureofmusic,which,thoughitmightbetransformedbychangingstylesandfashions,wasnotto
bedestroyed(freestylewasunderstoodasapermitteddeparturefromstrictstyleratherthanasa
suspensionofit).Incontrast,sincethelater18thcenturytherulesofcounterpointhavebeenseen
ashistoricallyspecific,hencealterable,norms(andthenatureofmusichasbeensoughtinthe
rudimentsofharmony)theyweretakenovereitherinordertoavoidabreakinthecontinuityofthe
developmentofthestyleofsacredmusic(Albrechtsberger)orinarevivalistspirit(Bellermann).
Sincethebreakwithtraditionthatoccurredaround1910,thecustomofcontinuingtoteach
counterpointintheFuxianmannerisgenerallyjustifiedbyarguingthatitispedagogically
necessarytodisciplinemusicalthoughtbymeansofexercisesindeadmaterial.(Nootherstyle
canbecodifiedtothesameextentascanthetechniqueofPalestrina.)
Thedistinctionbetweenstrictandfreestyle,whichcontrapuntaltheorysincethe17thcenturyhas
takenasitsstartingpoint,canbeexplainedbyconstructing(inMaxWeber'ssense)antithetic
idealtypes:complexesofcharacteristicswhichcoherecloselyandclearly,butalsocontrastwith
thecharacteristicsoftheothertype.Strictstyleistheoldertype,passeddownfromthe16th
century,andtypicalforchurchmusic(inCatholicregions)itisbasedoncantusfirmus,ismodalin
character,andproceedsfromtwopartwritingthecohesionofitssoundscomesfrominterval
progressionsparallelperfectconsonancesarestringentlyprohibitedandrigorousrulesare
formulatedtogoverndissonancesandfalserelationsthedidacticmethodisthesystemoffive
species.Freestyleisthelatertype,originatinginthe17thcenturyandconstantlyevolving,and
typicalforchamberortheatremusicitisbasedonsuperposedtwopartwriting(Hindemith,1937)
betweenmelodyandbass,istonalandharmonicincharacterandproceedsfromfourpartwriting,
fromthechordastheprimarydatumthecohesionofitssoundscomesfromchordprogressions
therearelooserregulationsforbiddingparallelperfectconsonancesandgoverningdissonances
andfalserelationsdidactically,rhythmicallydifferentiatedcounterpointisdevelopedfromnote
againstnotewritingbymeansoffiguration.
Althoughtheidealtypesofstrictandfreestylearescarcelyencounteredintheiractualforminthe
historyofmusictheorymosttheoristshavetriedtofindsomecompromisebecause,while
respectingthetraditionofstrictwriting,theyhavenotwantedtoneglecttheapparentrequirements
ofthedaytheantitheticalpresentationisnecessary:itservesasapointofreferenceamongthe
confusionofdoctrinalopinions,andevenconstitutesacriterionfortheassessmentofcontrapuntal
theories,sincelogicalflawsalmostalwaysresultfromdeviationsfromidealtypes.When,for
instance,Albrechtsbergerpostulatedthatoneshouldconductaharmonicandtonalanalysisofa
cantusfirmusbeforebuildingacounterpointonit,itis,strictlyspeaking,notunderstandablewhy
heshouldhavestartedoutfromtwopartwriting,hencefromanincompleteandtherefore
technicallymoredifficultpresentationoftheharmony,insteadofbeginningwithfourpartwritingas
didJ.S.BachandKirnberger.AndwhenDehnheldthatinstrictthreepartwritingadissonant
suspensionwasarelationshipnottoanothernote,buttoachord(2/1883),hewasledbythebias
of18thand19thcenturylisteninghabitstoignorefundamentalprinciplesofintervallicwriting,
andhismistakehastechnicalconsequences.
StrictstylecontrappuntoosservatowascodifiedbyFuxinaformwhosedidacticmeritssufficed
tomakehisGradusadParnassum(1725)aclassictextbookforatleasttwocenturies.IfFux
consequentlyappearsasthefounderofapedagogictradition,thecontentofhisbookrepresents
theinheritanceofatraditionreachingbacktoZarlino.Theprohibitionofhiddenparallels,most
simplyformulatedinthetenetthataperfectconsonancemustbereachedbycontrarymotions,has
beenexpressedintheformoffourrules(contrarymotionfromoneperfectconsonancetoanother
unrestrictedmotionfromaperfectconsonancetoanimperfectconsonanceunrestrictedmotion
fromoneimperfectconsonancetoanotherandcontrarymotionfromanimperfectconsonanceto
aperfectconsonance)sincethetimeofDiruta(1609).However,theprohibitionheldgoodonlyfor
theouterparts,althoughtheoristsoftenlaiddownstricterregulations.Theclassificationofthe
rhythmicrelationsbetweencantusfirmusandcounterpointintofivespecies(noteagainstnote
twonotesagainstonefournotesagainstonesyncopationinthesecondvoicecontrapunctus
floridus)canbefoundasearlyas1610inBanchieri'sCartellamusicale(1610).Thisscheme,often
criticizedandridiculedaspedantic,hasbeenperpetuatedwithapedagogicallymotivated
tenacityitishardlyreconcilablewiththehistoricalrealityofPalestrina'sstyle,whichprovidesless
anexampleofcantusfirmuscompositionthanawayofwritingbasedonpervasiveimitation
betweentextuallycharacterized,rhythmicallydifferentiatedparts.Therelativelystressedpassing
dissonancelastingasemiminim(crotchet),permissibleincertaincadentialformulaein
Palestrina'sstyle,wasreferredtobyBerardi(1689)asnotacambiata,sincetheconsonanceand
dissonancechangetheirusualplacesonthestressedandtheunstressedbeats(ex.17a).Fux,on
theotherhand,usedtheconceptofcambiata(Fux'sappoggiatura)torefertoadissonancethat
leapsdowna3rd,whoseorthodoxresolution,asJeppesenhasit(1925),isimmediatelyretrieved
witharising2nd(ex.17b).
Ex.17Notacambiata(a),afterBerardi(1689)Fuxsappoggiatura(b),afterJeppesen(1925)
TheFuxtraditionsomuchpredominatedintheteachingofstrictstyleduringthe18thand19th
centuries(itconstitutedtherudimentsofthestudyofcompositionforHaydn,Mozartand
Beethoven)thatothersystemscanclaimanyraisond'treonlybyvirtueoftheirdeparturefromhis
systemincertainessentialfeatures:atfirstwithcompromisesbetweenstrictwritingandfree,then
later(fromthemiddleofthe19thcentury)withthetendencytohistoricize.Albrechtsberger(1790)
emphasizedthatharmonicandtonalexaminationofthecantusfirmusshouldbeundertaken
beforecounterpointiswrittenCherubini(1835)renouncedthechurchmodesSechter(1854)
regardedwritingfortwoorthreepartsasreductionsoffourpartwriting,whichwashisstarting
point.
If,inconsequence,strictcounterpointmovednearertofreestyleinthelate18thcenturyandthe
early19ththroughattemptstoassimilateitintothechangingpracticeoftheecclesiasticalstyle,
whosetheorywasmouldedbyittheexactoppositehappenedduringthe19thcenturywhenthe
combinationofhistoricalawarenessincontrapuntaltheory(Bellermann,1862)withrevivalist
endeavoursincompositionalpractice(Haller,1891)ledtoatendencytoseetherulesof
counterpointinanarrower,stricterlight.Itwasdesiredtoreestablish,bothintheoryandin
practice,thetechniqueofPalestrina,theclassicalecclesiasticalstyle,exactly(toquoteRanke's
historiographicaldogma)asitactuallyhadbeen.Traditionalism,withitsunconscioustraffic
betweenpastandpresent,yieldedtoahistoricismmotivatedpartlybyphilologyandpartlyby
aesthetics.Inthe20thcentury,afterthedeclineoftheCecilianmovement,strictstylebecame
petrifiedintomusicalmentalexercisesinadeadlanguagetheLatinofmusicalinstruction.The
apparentlyindispensabledidacticconsiderationscannotalwaysbewhollyreconciledwith
historicalendeavourstogiveaprecisedescriptionofPalestrina'sstyle:evenJeppesen'stextbook
(1930),aparagonofpedagogicexpositionbyahistorian,resultsfroman(unacknowledged)
compromise.
CarlDahlhaus
14. Free style: licentious and harmonic

counterpoint.
Inspiteofsecondarychanges,thetheoryofstrictstyleisessentiallythatofanarrowlyconfined
techniqueofcomposition,historicallyspeaking,thestyleofPalestrinahoweveroneinterpretsthe
systemofrulesasanormgroundedintheverynatureofmusic,asabodyofdogmaattachingto
ahistoricalstyle,orasrulesofthegamefordidacticexercisesitisunequivocallycertaintowhich
fragmentofmusicalrealityitrelates.Theconceptoffreestyle,ontheotherhand,isacatchment
areaforextremevarietiesofstylethathaveprimarilyincommonanegativecharacteristic,their
departurefromthenormsofstrictstyle.Theusualprocedure(inappendixestotextbookson
counterpointorintheinstructionsforpartwritinginpracticaltextbooksonharmony)ofdescribing
freestylesolelyintermsofitspermitteddeviationfromstrictstyle,insteadofapprehendingitfrom
within,intheformofanidealtype,accordingtoitsownpostulates,hasarisenforanumberof
reasonssuchdescriptionseemsadeficiency,albeitanexcusableone.Itresults,first,fromthe
practiceofisolatingharmonictheoryfromthetheoryofcounterpoint,fromthesplittingupofthe
rudimentsofmoderncompositionaltechniqueintotwodisciplinessecond,fromthedifficultyof
extractingfromaconglomerateofstylesasingleinternally(andnotsimplyinanegativesense)
coherentsystemofrulesthird,fromthefactthatevenindividualstyles(suchasBach's
counterpoint)cannotbesoexhaustively,preciselyandsynopticallycodifiedascanthetechnique
ofPalestrinaandfinally,fromtheobservationthatthelawsgoverningtheevolutionof
counterpointfromthe17thcenturytothe20thhaveconsistedincounterpoint'sprogressive
emancipationfromthenormsofprimapratica.(Comparethiswiththe15thand16thcenturies,
whenthecourseofdevelopmentwaspreciselytheopposite:fromalessrigoroustoastricter
regulationofcomposition.)
Thestilemodernoofthe17thcentury,whichincludedthemonodic,theconcertanteandthe
madrigalstyles(asdidMonteverdistermsecondapratica),wasfounded,ontheonehand,as
licentiouscounterpoint,onthetransgressionofthenormsofstrictstyleatransgression
groundedinthetendencytoemotionalexpressionandpictorialorallegoricalwordpainting.On
theotherhand,asharmoniccounterpoint,itwasdistinguishedfromtheprimapraticaofthe16th
centuryandfromtheecclesiasticalstylethatpreservedthattraditionbybeingrootedintonal
harmony.However,licentiouscounterpointoughtnottobeequatedsimplywithharmonic
counterpoint:noteverydeviationfromcontrappuntoosservatoismotivatedbytonalharmony.The
bestknownsuchdeviationstheirregularitiesinMonteverdi'smadrigals,abominatedbyArtusi,
andseenbyFtisastheearliestdocumentofmoderntonalityarisefromothercauses.The
downwardleapofadissonantsuspensionfroma7thtoa3rd(asinex.18)isinMonteverdian
expressivefigurethatowesitspathostoitsstrikingdeparturefromtherulesofstrictwriting,butthis
licencecannotbeinterpretedintermsoftonalharmony(onecannotspeakofmovementwithin
thechord).Bernhard(c1657)explainedthisfigure,whichheconsideredamongthetoolsof
musicalrhetoric,asaheterolepsis(arecoursetoanothermelodicpart):theuppervoice
changesitsusualresolution,the6th,forthe3rd,whichreallybelongstothemiddlevoice.
Ex.18Downwardleapofadissonantsuspensionfroma7thtoa3rd
AfteritsuncertainbeginningsinMonteverdi,theuseoftonalharmonyasabasisforcounterpoint
graduallyincreasedfromthelate17thcentury,thoughitdidnotbecomeuniversaltheoretical
signpostsinthisdevelopmentincludethewritingsofMasson(1694)and,particularly,Rameau
(1722).Thedevelopmentwasnevercomplete:thebeliefthatinharmonicallytonalmusicevery
detailwasdeterminedbymeansoftonalharmonyisanexaggerationresultingfromover
systematicthinking.Inharmonicallytonalwriting(andalsoincontrapuntalwriting)harmonies,
namelytriadsandchordsofthe7th,constitutetheprimary,directlyavailableentitiesfromwhich
thecomposerstartedout.Fromthisbasisinharmonythereresultsthedistinctionbetweenchordal
dissonances,whichbelongtotheharmony(the7thinthechordofthe7th),andnotesforeignto
theharmony,whichconstituteanexternaladjuncttoit.Achordaldissonancemustberesolved,
butneednotbepreparedandforitsownpart,asacomponentoftheharmony,itcanfunctionas
theresolutionofanoteforeigntoit.(Inbar4ofMozart'sJupiterSymphonyeventheoctaveisa
noteforeigntotheharmony,asuspensionleadingtothe7th.)Naturallya7thdoesnotalways
countasachordaldissonance,butonlywhenitsresolutioncoincideswithachangeofroot(asin
ex.19a)andthuswhenthedissonanceisadeterminingfactorintheharmonicdevelopmentas
representedbytherootprogression(seeBASSEFONDAMENTALE).Conversely,ifthenotetowhicha
dissonancerelatesremainsunmoved(asinex.19b),thenthe7thistobeunderstoodasanote
foreigntotheharmony,i.e.asuspension.
Ex.19The7thasachordaldissonance(a),andasuspension(b)
Sincethelater17thcentury,composers'useoffreecounterpointhasbeencharacterizedbythe
factthatdissonantfigurestakenfromlicentiouscounterpointaccentedpassingnotesor
downwardleapingsuspensionshavebeenconceivedintermsoftherequirementsofharmonic
counterpoint,andhencerelatedtotriadsandchordsofthe7thinsteadoftoindividualnotes.Itis
truethatcontrapuntaltheoryadmittedharmonicallyfoundedphenomenaonlyhesitantly.In
Bernhard'sattempttosketchoutacontrapuntaltheoryofsecondapratica(thus,tocodifywhatis
notreallysusceptibleofcodification),thedissonantfiguresoflicentiouscounterpoint,thestylus
luxurians,aredescribedwithoutregardtotheirharmonicpreconditionsorimplications.
Phenomenasuchastheaccentedpassingnote(transitusinversus),theupwardordownward
leapingappoggiatura(superjectioorsubsumptio)andtheresolutionofasuspensionbyleap
(syncopatiocatachrestica)orbyastepupwards(mora)arescarcelyproblematicandtheirnature
asexceptionstostrictcounterpoint,whichisclearfromthefactthattheyarereferredbacktothe
normfromwhichtheydeviate,isnotopentodispute.However,inaquotationfromarecitative
(ex.20a),whichBernhardreducedtoabareskeleton(ex.20b)inordertoelucidateitsfreestyleas
aparaphraseofapieceofstrictcounterpoint,thusexplainingitasanagglomerationoflicences
anellipsis(einsteadoffe),aquaesitionotae(c dinsteadofd)andananticipatio(e)there
maybedoubtastowhetheritisnotsimplyamatterofabrokendiminished7thchord.Henceone
mayquestionwhetherBernhardwasdescribingwhatheheardorwhetherhismusicalperception
hasbeenmisrepresentedinhistheoryforwantofotherthancontrapuntalterminology.
Ex.20Recitative(a)reducedinordertoelucidateitsfreestyleasaparaphraseofstrictcounterpoint(b),after
Bernhard(c1657)
Intheirdescriptionsoffreestyle,Heinichen(1728)andMattheson(1739),too,startedoutfromthe
categoriesoflicentiouscounterpoint:inclearcontradictionofthelisteninghabitsoftheirtime,and
eventheirownperceptions,theyexplainedasananticipatiotransitustheunprepareduseofthe
7thinthedominant7thchordonastrongbeat.The7th,whichinstrictwritingshouldappearonly
onaweakbeatasapassingnote,isinterpretedasbeinganticipatedonthestrongbeat.
Kirnberger(17719),whotookoverthebasicpropositionsofRameau'stheoryofharmony,
outlinedatheoryoffreecompositionsustainedbyanawarenessoftonalharmonicimplications
hetookashisstartingpointfourpartwritingratherthantwopartdissonancesareclassifiedeither
asessential(dissonantchords)orfortuitous(notesforeigntotheharmony)andembellishedor
variegatedcounterpointproceedsfromthefigurationofaharmonicframework.
Fromachoralewithcontinuoaccompaniment(ex.21a)theseeminglytwopartwritingimplies
fourpartwritingbythecontinuoKirnbergerevolvedamotiviccounterpoint(ex.21b).Theupper
partdecoratesdissonantchordsmelodically(chordsofthe2nd,a65anda7th)andistobe
understoodnotasanintervallicprogression(aswhichitwouldbeabsurd)butasfreemovement
withinthechord,withanticipatorydissonances,hencenotesforeigntotheharmony,onevery
fourthquaver.Thepartwritingisjustifiedbythechordsthatconstitutetheimplicitor(inthe
continuo)explicitbackgroundtothecomposition.
Ex.21Motiviccounterpoint(b)evolvedbyKirnberger(17719)fromachoralewithcontinuoaccompaniment(a)
CarlDahlhaus
15. Bach.
AlongsidethestyleofPalestrina,theinstrumentalpolyphonyofJ.S.Bachconstitutesoneofthe
modelsthathavedeterminedcontrapuntaltheory.WhereasPalestrina'sstyleallowsbarelyany
doubtoveritsrules,oratleastitsbasicrules,thetechniqueofBach'scounterpointhasnotyet
beenadequatelydescribedandthereissomecontroversyabouttheprinciplesonwhichitis
founded.
Thehabitofdefiningpolyphonyasacombinationofequalmelodicparts,theprestigeofthefugue
asaconsummateexpressionofinstrumentalcounterpoint,andaonesidedconcentrationon
organandkeyboardmusic(asinSpitta'sthesisoftheprimacyoforganstyleinBach'soutput)all
contributedtoneglectofthefactthatanothertypeofpolyphony,bornealongbyacontinuobass
andwiththemelodicpartsnotofequalimportancebutgraded,isnotlesscharacteristicofBach's
musicthanisthefugaltype.TodistortthetitleofabookbyHalm(1913),itispossibletospeakof
twoculturesofcounterpointinBach.
Continuopolyphonyorconcertantecounterpointisfoundedontheprincipleofafunctional
differentiationbetweentheparts:thecounterpointishierarchical.InBach'sarias,wherethewriting
isundeniablycontrapuntal,thevocalpart,theconcertanteinstrumentandtheunderpinningofthe
continuomakeupakindofthreepartwriting,differingfromfugalwritingprincipallyinthattheparts
fulfildifferentfunctionsthroughoutratherthanfulfillingthesamefunctions(e.g.subject,counter
subjectorcharacteristiccounterpoint,complementarycounterpoint)inalternatinggroupings.
IncontinuopolyphonyofthelateBaroqueperiodthereisacoalescenceofheterogeneous
traditions,anditispreciselybecauseofthisvarietythatitdisplaysanunsurpassedabundanceof
contrapuntalpossibilities.Thesetraditionsincludedtheideaofpolyphonicwritingoriginatingwith
theprimapratica:apolyphonyeloquentineveryoneofitsmelodicpartsmonodicstyleasthe
realizationofadeclamatoryorcantabile,expressiveorallegoricaltypeofvocalmelodicwriting
theprincipleofconcertantewriting,withwhichthegrowthofidiomaticinstrumentalmotifwas
closelyassociatedand,finally,thecontinuoasbearerofchordprogressions,throughwhose
harmonictonaldefinitionalineardeploymentofthemelodicpartswasnotimpededorrestricted
butrather,onthecontrary,sustained(asalreadymentioned).
TheideaofdeducingatheoryofBachiancounterpointlessfromhisfugaltechniquethanfromhis
typicalconcertantecontinuopolyphonyoughtnottoappeartoostrange.Forinsofarastheperiod
between1600and1730,whentechnicaldevelopmentsculminatedinBach'scompositional
technique,hasproperlybeendescribedasthecontinuoperiod(Riemann)andastheageofthe
concertantestyle(Handschin),ahistorianwillfinditnaturaltoaffirmthatconcertantecontinuo
polyphonyrepresentstheessentialparadigm(resultingfromtheparticularcircumstancesofthe
time)forBach'scounterpoint.
SinceKurth(1917)coinedthetermlinearcounterpointatermwhosesubsequentuseasa
watchwordheregardedasamisunderstandingthecontroversyoverwhetherBach's
counterpointwasprimarilylinearlyorharmonicallydeterminedhascontinuedtorage.Inorderto
avoidanexcessivelyobdurateoppositionbetweenconflictingdogmas,thetechnicalaspectofthe
problemmaybedistinguishedfromtheaesthetic.Technically(orlogically)speaking,Bach's
counterpointisvirtuallyalwaysgroundedintonalharmony,andwherethethematicaspectofhis
musiccomesintoconflictwiththeharmonic,itisthethematicratherthantheharmonicthatis
adjusted.
Thedissonancesequenceinbar28oftheInventioninDminor(ex.22a)wouldbeabsurdifitwere
notheardasanembellishmentofthechordofAminor:notesbelongingtothechordinthebass
coincidewithaccentedpassingnotesintheupperpart,andnotesbelongingtothechordinthe
upperpartwithunaccentedpassingnotesinthebass.Theconverseisrare:thefactthatinbars11
and12ofthesamepiece(ex.22b)apassageofcounterpointisinitselfcomprehensibleasa
progressionofintervalswhilethechordalsignificanceofbar11asawholeremainsuncertain
(oscillatingbetweenGminorwithadded7thandB majorwithalower3rd)representsan
exceptionalcase.Consequently,Kurth'stheorythattheharmonyisalwaysaresultantratherthan
astartingpointorpreconditionatheoryintendedasasuggestivehypothesis,andhenceunable
tobearinterpretationasadogmabecomesquestionableorevenerroneousasanassertion
aboutBach'scontrapuntaltechnique.Itcanstillremainreasonableasanaestheticpostulate,oras
arequirementtobemetbymusicalperception.Itwillthenmeanthatlistenersareexpectedtogive
theirattentionprimarilytothemovementfeatureoftheindividualpartsandunderstand
simultaneitiesasmeanstosupportthemusic'slineardynamics.
Ex.22J.S.Bach:InventioninDMinor
Thefactthattechnically,orlogically,seenmanysuchmovementfeaturesresultfromthe
necessitytoresolvedissonances,andthusthattheenergeticimpetusoriginatesinthemusic's
harmonyratherthaninitslinearity,neednothoweverpreventonefromperceivingaesthetically
thedissonancesasmeansofreinforcingmovementfeatures.Thesewillthusbeaccorded
aestheticpriorityeventhough,intechnicalrespects,theyrepresentaresultant:whatislogically
primarywillappearasaestheticallysecondary,andviceversa.(Theattempttotallyto
psychologizethetheoryofcounterpoint,asanencroachmentofamannerofaestheticperception
intothedescriptionoftechnicalrudiments,wouldunderminethetheory.)
If,then,Bach'scounterpointisgroundedintonalharmony,itisalsomotivicallycharacterized.
NeitherlinesinKurth'ssenseoftheword(whicharetobefoundinOckeghemratherthanin
Bach)normelodicdesignsthatimitatetherhythmsandpitchesofspeech,butrathermotifsand
figurationsofinstrumentaloriginrepresenttheprimesubstancefoundinBach'spolyphony.
(Fuguesubjectsandcountersubjectsarecomplexesofmotifsandfigurations.)
Inbars9and10ofthebourrefromFrenchSuiteno.6(ex.23),thesimplerootprogressionin5ths
andtheformulaicmelodicfiguresovershadowtheirregulardissonances:thecontrapuntaldetails
remainaestheticallyunobtrusive,sincelogically,inthestructureofthewriting,theyaresubsidiary.
TheintervalsequencesthatinthestyleofPalestrinaweretheveryessenceofcounterpointhave
nowbecomemerelyabyproductofthetonalharmonicandmotiviccharacterizationofthe
polyphony.
Ex.23Irregulardissonancesovershadowedthroughtheuseofformulaicmelodicfigures,J.S.Bach:FrenchSuite
no.6,Bourre
Contrapuntalphenomenathatcannotbeexplainedbyreferencetotheusualcategoriesmayoften
resultfromthesuperimpositionofmelodicpartsthatmoveaccordingtodifferentrhythmiclevels.In
thesecondmovementofthetriosonatafromBach'sMusicalOffering,bars4951,theoutervoices
formachromaticchainof6thsand7thsinacrotchetrhythm(thebassbeingthematic).Butthe
progressioncanbereducedtoadiatonicmodelinminims(ex.24),acontrapuntalprocedurethat
datesbacktothe15thcentury.Itistothisdiatonic,reducedversionthatonemustrelatetheinner
partiftheharmonies,whichdeviatefromthenormsoftonalharmony,aretobecome
comprehensible:thenotesginbar50andfinbar51,whichappeartobedominant7thsleft
unresolved,areinfact5ths.Theapparentchordsofthedominant7thareanincidentalresultofthe
rhythmicandchromaticmodificationofanoriginalcontrapuntalmodel.
Ex.24Chromaticchainof6thsand7ths(a)reducedtoadiatonicmodel(b),J.S.Bach:MusicalOffering,triosonata,
2ndmovt
ThefactthatdefiningBach'scounterpointbecomesacomplicatedbusiness,sinceonehasto
speakbothofconcertantecontinuopolyphonyandofhierarchicallyorganizedcounterpoint,ought
notbethoughtadeficiency.Itispreciselytothemultiplicityofhistoricalconditionsonwhichitis
basedthatBach'spolyphonyowes,first,itsabundanceoffiguralmaterial(andthathasalways
beenacauseforadmiration)and,second,itsnumerousdeterminingfactors,whichcouldonlyfail
tobeappreciatedwhenitwassoughttodeducethecounterpointfromasingleprinciple,thatof
linearity.
CarlDahlhaus
16. The Classical and Romantic eras.

Theperiodbetweenthelateryearsofthe18thcenturyandthebeginningofthe20thisaccounted
oneinwhichcounterpointsanktobeingamereacademicexercise,leavingbarelyrecognizable
tracesinthepracticeofcomposersofpianoandoperaticmusic.Yetanimmenselandscapeof
musicalworksbearingaprimarilyhomophonicimprintisrelievedbyisolatedpolyphonicworksor
groupsofworkswhich,inbothspiritandtechnique,recallolderstyles.Archaisticcounterpoint,
lookingbacktothemodelsofPalestrinaorBach,wasbynomeanstheonlyonetypescanbe
citedthatdistinguishthisperiodfromearliercenturies(providedonedoesnotcutoffaccesstothe
phenomenathatconstitutethetypicalcounterpointofthe19thcenturybytheuseofadefinition
restrictingtheconceptofgenuinecounterpointtotheolderstyle).
TherevivalofPalestrina'sstyle,athrowbackforwhichthespiritoftheRomanticmovementwas
responsible,wassustainedbytheenthusiasticbeliefthatonly16thcenturyvocalpolyphonycould
betruechurchmusic:amaximsharedbyProtestantwriters(suchasE.T.A.Hoffmannand
Thibaut)andCatholicalike.Sinceitremainedrestrictedtosacredmusic,thisreverencefor
Palestrinacouldevenbetotallyreconciledwiththechampioningofmusicalprogresswhichthe
NewGermanschoolbelieveditstoodfor:LisztsympathizedwiththeaimsoftheCecilian
movement,andthatleftitsmarkonhiscompositions.Inthe19thcentury,ofcourse,themost
importantaspectofPalestrina'sstyleusedtoinculcateadevotionalframeofmindwasnotso
muchthestricttechniqueofcompositionasrathertheseraphictoneofamusicwhosetempowas
dilatedsothatitcouldbemadetoconveythenotionofhallowedstrainsfelttobeemanatingfrom
someGreatBeyond.AlthoughBellermann'sworkinlayingdownpreciserulesforcompositionin
thisstyle(1862)cameaboutinconnectionwiththechurchmusicrevival,italsoindicatesthatthe
objectivetaskofhistoricalreconstructionbecamedivorcedfromRomanticenthusiasm.
WhiletherevivalofPalestrina'sstyleappearsprimarilytohavebeenamatterofresuscitationand
performanceofexistingmusic,andonlysecondarilyintrudingintotherealmofcomposition,the
influenceofBachscounterpointwasofconcerntocomposers:itwasamatteroftheirprofessional
equipment.TheinfluenceexertedbyBachonChopinandMendelssohn,SchumannandBrahms
shouldnotbesoughtsolelyinfuguesandfughettas:itcanalso,andindeedparticularly,befeltin
theircharacterpieces.TheproblemthatRomanticcomposerssoughttosolvebyreferringbackto
Bachconsistedinthedifficultyofwritinginastrictstylehencewithoutfallingintothetechnical
heedlessnessofthegeneralrunofoperaticandkeyboardmusicwhileproducingworksthat
werepoeticratherthanprosaic(underwhichheadingSchumanncategorizednotjustlightmusic
butalsothemerelytechnicalworkofart).Whattheysawrealizedinexemplaryfashioninthe
musicofBachwastheideaofmusicatoncecontrapuntalandfullofcharacter,atoncestrictand
eloquent:musicinwhichthecharacteristicandtheeloquentfeaturesofacontrapuntally
differentiatedtexturewerenotforcedonitfromoutsidebutwereactuallygeneratedbyit.
IntheinstrumentalmusicoftheClassicalandRomanticerasthefuguerepresentsakindof
counterpointthoughtofasstrict,althoughactuallyitwasaspecialcaseoffreestyle.However,
sonataandfugueorrather,sonataformandfugaltechniquewerecloselyrelated:therewasa
tendencyforthetwoculturesofmusictocoalesceintoathird.Ontheonehand,asdemonstrated
byHaydn'sevolutionfromop.20toop.33,fugueandfugatowereprerequisitesofthematicworking
outinthetechniqueofClassicalandRomanticdevelopmentsections.Ontheother,asthe
tendencygrewforthematicdevelopmenttospreadoverentiremovements,itbecamelogicalto
characterizethedevelopmentsectionbyanintensificationofmotivicworktothepointoffugal
techniqueandthusmarkitoutasdistinctfromtheexpositionandtherecapitulation.In
Beethoven'slatequartets,inBrahmsandeveninLiszt,fugaltechniquewasineffectdisplayedas
aconsequenceofthematicworking.
ThecontinuationofthesecondsubjectinthefirstmovementofSchubert'sStringQuintetinC,a
melodyincanon,providesaperfectexampleoftherealizationofanideathatconstantlyrecursin
the19thcentury,inoperaticensemblesaswellasinsubsidiarythemesofBrucknersymphonies:
theideaofacantabilecounterpoint,orofacontrapuntalcantabilestyle.Thefactthatto
aestheticiansthismusthaveseemedahybrid,sinceitfloutedtheconventionwherebycantabile
wasassociatedwithhomophonicstyleandpolyphonywithanunbendingthematicstyle,wasseen
bycomposerslessasaninhibitingfactorthanasachallengetotransformthiscontradictionintoan
aestheticpropositionandthusabenefit.Indeed,itwascharacteristicofthe19thcenturythatit
tendedtobringtogetherapparentlymutuallyexclusiveopposites.
ThethematiccombinationsinthepreludetoWagnersDieMeistersingerandinthefinalduetof
Siegfriedthesimultaneous,notwhollyunforced,presentationofleitmotifsthathadbeen
independentlycoinedwerefeltbySchenkertobeabetrayaloftheconceptofcounterpoint
RichardStraussonthecontrarypraisedthemastheonlyadequateformofcounterpointinanage
ofexpressivemusic(andtooktheideatotechnicalandaestheticextremesinSalomeand
Elektra,aspsychologicalcounterpoint).Hereitisundoubtedlyamatterofcounterpointasan
expressionofliteraryideas:themotifsarenotrelatedasmelodiclinesbutassociatedaesthetically
assymbolsofideasandemotions,whilebeingtechnicallypiecedtogetherasencrustations
aroundoneandthesamechord(notwithoutfissuresandflaws).Theproceduremaybethought
technicallyquestionablebutduringaperiodtypifiedbymusicdramaandsymphonicpoems
genresbearingastrongliterarystampitshouldnotseemsurprisingiftheseliterarytendencies
infiltratedcontrapuntaltechnique.Or,toputitanotherway,ifoneisgoingtocondemnliterary
counterpoint,one'sjudgmentmustalsoincludeliterarymusicasawhole.
Polyphonywrittenaroundchords,andtherelessforitsownsakethanforthefactthatitimpartsa
richerandmorevariegatedeffecttotheorchestralsound,hascomeintodisreputeaspseudo
polyphony.Thisterm,eitherexplicitlyortacitly,containstheaestheticomoralreproachthat
counterpoint,whichoughttobeanend,hasherebeenrelegatedtotheroleofameans,afactor
subservienttothequalityofsound:insteadofbeingrenderedclearbymeansofinstrumentation,
theexactoppositehappensanditismadetoserveasavehicleofsonority.(Instrumentswhose
partsarecharacterizedbyexpressivitymakeabettersonorousimpact,eventhoughthedetailsof
whattheyhavetosayarequiteinaudible.)Inthisjudgmentisconcealedaprejudicethatthe
parametersofmusicfallintoanunalterablehierarchicalorder:accordingtothis,contrapuntal
structurewouldasamatterofcoursebetheprimaryfactorandinstrumentationmerelysecondary.
Intheevolutionofcompositionduringthemid20thcenturythisprejudicehasbeenoverthrown,so
thatinretrospectevenahistoricalphenomenonsuchasthedegradationofcounterpointtoa
meanstowardsrichnessofsonorityappearsinaverydifferentaestheticlight.
Textbooks,whichfordidacticreasonsareinclinedtosimplifymattersbysettingupclear
antitheses,suggestthatcounterpointfunctionsasanoppositetoharmony,thuspromotingthe
viewthatanevolutionofharmonyembracingvariedchordalstructuresandmethodsoflinking
chordsmustnecessarilyentailasuppressionofpolyphony.ButinthemusicofBrahmsand
Wagnertheoppositeispatentlythecase.TheharmonicrichnesscharacteristicofBrahmsformsa
corollarytoakindofmelodicallyconceivedbasswriting(insteadofbeingconfinedtoasmall
numberofsupportingnotes)andtherelationshipofsuchabasstothemelodiclinebecomesa
contrapuntalframeworkforthecompositionaltechnique.InWagner'sharmonyitistheindividual
characterizationofchordsbymeansofdissonancesandchromaticvariantsthatcreates
consequencesinthecontrapuntalwriting:ontheonehandthedissonant,complicatedchords
impeltheirownpartwritingontheother,sincetherootprogressioninthebassisoftenweakand
notcapableofsustainingitsload,chordsmustbelinkedbymotivicpartwriting.Hencethepart
writingmusttendtowardspolyphonyifthejuxtapositionofchordsistohavetheeffectofa
compellingprogression.
CarlDahlhaus
17. 20th century.

Theemphasisoncounterpointinmusicafter1910canbeseenasacorollaryofthediminishing
importanceoftonalharmony.Chordalcoherencelostitsfundamentalimportance,anddidso
regardlessofwhethertonalitywasdissolved(Schoenberg,Berg,Webern)ormetamorphosed
(Stravinsky,Bartk,Hindemith).Thevarioustypesofexpandedtonality(whoseprincipalfeatureis
not,however,expansion)appearashierarchicallyorderedsystemsanalogoustotraditional
tonalitybutitislesschordsthanindividualnotesroundwhichtheyspinawebofrelationships,so
thatitismorenaturalforthetonalstructurestobecharacterizedbymelodicandpolyphonicthan
byhomophonicstyle.
Amongthetechniquesthatdissolvedtonalharmony,biorpolytonalityisnotableforitstendency
topromoteacontrapuntalstyle.Althoughitappearstoproceedfromthesuperimpositionofchords
ofdifferentkeys(asinStrauss'sElektra),itispossibletoconsiderthecontrapuntalmanifestation
(asinMilhaud)asthetrulyrepresentativeone.Polytonal(orpolymodal)counterpointisaparadox
ofcompositionaltechniqueinthatthetonalatomizationofthestyleasawholerequiresa
particularlycleartonalcharacterizationoftheindividualpartsotherwisepolytonalitywhose
aestheticimportconsistsinthepointednessofitseffectwillturnintothegreyongreyoftonal
indistinguishability.
Theproblemsof12notecounterpointinevitablyraisetheproblemsof12notetechniqueasa
wholehereitisnecessarytorestrictthediscussiontocommentsonsomemisunderstandingsor
detailsthathavebeentakenoutofcontext.First,theemancipationofthedissonance,the
liberationofdissonancesfromthenecessityofresolution,merelymeansthatthespecific
differencebetweenconsonancesanddissonances,whichgaverisetothedependenceof
dissonancesonconsonances,hasbeenabolished,andnotthatchordsnolongerpossessvarying
degreesofconsonanceanddissonancewithwhichthecomposercanwork(Krenek,1940).In12
notecounterpoint,too,thereisaharmonicgradient(Hindemith,1937).Second,Schoenberg's
procedureofformulatinga12noterowinsuchawaythatthefirsthalfoftheoriginalformtogether
withthefirsthalfoftheinversiontransposeddowna5thforma12notecomplex(whatBabbitt
calledcombinatoriality)representsawayoutofthedilemma:fortheprincipleofdodecaphony,
thenonrepetitionofnotesbeforearowhasbeenstatedinitsentirety,iscontravenedassoonas
incidentalnoterepetitionsareproducedbythesimultaneoususeofdifferentformsoftherow.
Wheretherowitselfisaprimarilymelodicprinciple,combinatorialitypresentsitselfasasustaining
principleofakindofstrictwritingin12notecounterpoint.Third,dodecaphoniccounterpointin
Schoenberg(thoughnotinWebern)istobeunderstoodasthematicormotiviccounterpoint.
Schoenbergdidnotconstruct12noterowsinanabstractway,butasthematicshapes(though
naturallytheywouldbemodifiedforconstructionalpurposes)andtheassertionthatbyvirtueof
dodecaphonictechniqueasdistinctfromfreeatonality,whichtendedeithertowards
dependenceonatextortowardsanaphoristicstyleitwouldoncemorebepossibletocompose
largescaleformsininstrumentalmusicsimplymeansthatdodecaphonictechniquepermittedthe
formulationofthemescapableofsustainingalargescalemusicalstructure.
Thetermlinearcounterpoint(Kurth,1917)shouldnotbemistakenasasynonymforaheedless
sortofpolyphonypayingnoattentiontoverticalsimultaneities.Itsdistinctivefeatureisratherthe
conceptofmelody,whichservedasthestartingpointfortheadherentsofthenewobjectivity
whentheysetuplinearcounterpointasanantitypetotheRomanticharmonytheydespised:the
notionofakindofmelodicwritingnotreliantonchordsandchordalprogressions,butevolved
fromthealliancesandoppositionsofleapsandsteps,ascentsanddescents,longandshort
values,indeedakindofstructureofpitchandrhythmrepresentingastateofenergy(Kurth)and
strivingtowardsanequilibriumwhich,however,itcanonlyachieveattheverylast,sothatthe
melodicmovementwillnotcometoastandstillbeforethefinalcadence.Counterpoint,however,is
inthisstylenothingmorethanmultiplemelody,andissubjecttothesamecriteriaofenergyasisa
singlemelody:thepartssupport,enhanceorcontradicteachothertheycrossorcomplement
eachother.
CarlDahlhaus
Bibliography
Up to 1800
formoderneditionsandfacsimilesseeindividualarticles
ProsdocimusdeBeldemandis:Contrapunctus(1412)
GuilielmusMonachus:Depreceptisartismusicae(MS,c1480)
B.RamosdePareia:Musicapractica(Bologna,1482)
N.Burtius:Musicesopusculum(Bologna,1487)
G.Guerson:Utilissimemusicalesregule(Paris,c1490)
F.Gaffurius:Practicamusicae(Milan,1496,2/1497)
N.Wollick:Opusaureummusicae(Cologne,1501)
J.Cochlaeus:Musica(n.p.,c1504,enlarged2/c1505[inDLEu,anon.insource],3/1507,abridged4/1515)
D.M.Durn:Smuladecantodergano,contrapuntoycomposicin,vocalyinstrumentalprticay
especulativa(Salamanca,c1504)
A.Ornithoparchus:Musicaeactivaemicrologus(Leipzig,1517/R)
G.Rhau:Enchiridionmusicaemensuralis(Leipzig,1520,2/1530,10/1553)
P.Aaron:Thoscanellodelamusica(Venice,1523/Rrev.withsuppl.asToscanelloinmusica,2/1529/R,
3/1539/R,4/1562)
G.M.Lanfranco:Scintilledimusica(Brescia,1533/R)
S.Vanneo:Recanetumdemusicaaurea(Rome,1533/R)
H.Glarean:Dodecachordon(Basle,1547/R)
A.P.Coclico:Compendiummusices(Nuremberg,1552/R)
N.Vicentino:L'anticamusicaridottaallamodernaprattica(Rome,1555/R,2/1557)
G.Zarlino:Leistitutioniharmoniche(Venice,1558/R,rev.3/1573/R)
G.M.Artusi:L'artedelcontrapontoridottaintavole(Venice,1586)
V.Galilei:Discorsointornoall'usodelledissonanze(MS,158891,IFn)
V.Galilei:Ilprimolibrodellapratticadelcontrapuntointornoall'usodelleconsonanze(MS,158891,IFn)
P.Pontio:Ragionamentodimusicaovesitrattade'passaggietdelmododifarmotetti,messe,salmiet
altrecompositioni(Parma,1588)
O.Tigrini:Compendiodellamusica(Venice,1588)
G.M.Artusi:Secondapartedell'artedelcontraponto,nellaqualesitrattadellutileetusodelledissonanze
(Venice,1589)
S.Calvisius:Melopoeia(Erfurt,1592)
P.Pontio:Dialogoovesitrattadellatheoricaetpratticadimusica(Parma,1595)
T.Morley:APlaineandEasieIntroductiontoPracticallMusicke(London,1597/R)
J.P.Sweelinck,attrib.:CompositionsRegeln(MS,c1600,AWm,DBsb)
S.Cerreto:Dellapratticamusicavocaleetstrumentale(Naples,1601,2/1611)
G.Diruta:SecondapartedelTransilvano,dialogodivisoinquattrolibri(Venice,1609)
A.Banchieri:Cartellamusicalenelcantofiguratofermoecontrappunto(Venice,1610,3/1614)
J.Lippius:Synopsismusicaenovaeomninoveraeatquemethodicaeuniversae(Strasbourg,1612)[largelya
republicationofDisputatiomusicasecunda(Wittenberg,1609)andDisputatiomusicatertia(Wittenberg,
1610)]
P.Cerone:Elmelopeoymaestro(Naples,1613/R)
G.Coprario:RuleshowtoCompose(MS,before1617,USSM)
C.Angleria:Laregoladelcontraponto,edellamusicalcompositione(Milan,1622)
L.Zacconi:Pratticademusica:secondaparte(Venice,1622/R)
M.Effrem:CensuresoprailsestolibrodemadrigalidiM.MarcodaGagliano(Venice,1623)
J.Crger:Synopsismusica,continensrationemconstituendietcomponendimelosharmonicum,conscripta
variisqueexemplisillustrata(Berlin,1630,enlarged2/1654)
M.Scacchi:CribrummusicumadtriticumSyfertianum,seuexaminatiosuccintapsalmorum(Venice,1643)
P.Syfert:AnticribratiomusicaadavenamScacchianam(Danzig,1645)
M.Scacchi:Brevediscorsosopralamusicamoderna(Warsaw,1649)
A.Kircher:Musurgiauniversalis(Rome,1650/R)
J.A.Herbst:Artepratticaetpotica,dasistEinkurtzerUnterrichtwiemaneinenContrapunctmachenund
componirensollernen(Frankfurt,1653)
G.Avella:Regolidimusica,diviseincinquetrattati(Rome,1657)
C.Bernhard:Tractatuscompositionisaugmentatus(MS,c1657)
L.Penna:Liprimialborimusicaliperliprincipiantidellamusicafigurata(Bologna,1672,4/1684/R,5/1696)
G.M.Bononcini:Musicopratticochebrevementedimostrailmododigiungereallaperfettacognizioneditutte
quellecose,checoncorronoallacomposizionedeicantiedicich'all'artedelcontrapuntosirecerca,op.8
(Bologna,1673/R)
A.Berardi:Documentiarmonici(Bologna,1687)
A.Berardi:Miscellaneamusicale(Bologna,1689)
A.Berardi:Arcanimusicali(Bologna,1690)
C.Masson:Nouveautraitdesrglespourlacompositiondelamusique(Paris,1694)
G.A.AngeliniBontempi:Historiamusica(Perugia,1695/R)
J.G.Walther:PraeceptadermusicalischenComposition(MS,1708,DWRtl)
J.P.Rameau:Traitd'harmonie(Paris,1722/R)
J.J.Fux:GradusadParnassum(Vienna,1725,2/1745)
J.D.Heinichen:DerGeneralBassinderComposition,oderNeueundgrndlicheAnweisung(Dresden,
1728)
J.Euler:Tentamennovaetheoriaemusicae(StPetersburg,1739)
J.Mattheson:DervollkommeneCapellmeister(Hamburg,1739/R)
F.W.Marpurg:AbhandlungvonderFugenachdemGrundstzenderbestendeutschenundauslndischen
Meister(Berlin,17534/R,2/1858)
F.W.Marpurg:HandbuchbeydemGeneralbasseundderCompositionmitzweydreyvierfnfsechs
siebenachtundmehrerenStimmen(Berlin,17558/R,suppl.,1760/R2/1762/R[vol.ionly]:Anhang(Berlin,
1760/R)
J.P.Kirnberger:DieKunstdesreinenSatzesinderMusik(BerlinandKnigsberg,17719)
G.B.Martini:Esemplare,ossiasaggiofondamentalepraticodicontrappuntosoprailcantofermo,i(Bologna,
1774),ii(Bologna,1775)
J.P.Kirnberger:GedankenberdieverschiedenenLehrarteninderKomposition(Berlin,1782)
J.G.Albrechtsberger:GrndlicheAnweisungzurKomposition(Leipzig,1790)
After 1800
MGG2(KontrapunktC.Palisca,W.Krtzfeld)
A.Reicha:Coursdecompositionmusicale,ouTraitcompletetraisonndharmoniepratique(Paris,1818
Eng.trans.,1854/R)
F.J.Ftis:Traitducontrepointetdelafugue(Paris,1824,enlarged2/1846)
A.Reicha:Traitdehautecompositionmusicale(Paris,18246)
L.Cherubini:Coursdecontrepointetdefugue(Paris,1835Eng.trans.,1837)
A.B.Marx:DieLehrevondermusikalischenKompositionpraktischtheoretisch,i(Leipzig,1837,10/1903
Eng.trans.,1852)ii:DiefreieKomposition(Leipzig,1837,7/1890)iii(Leipzig,1845,5/1879)iv(Leipzig,
1847,5/1888Eng.trans.,1910)
J.C.Lobe:CompositionslehreoderUmfassendeLehrevonderthematischenArbeit(Leipzig,1844)
J.C.Lobe:LehrbuchdermusikalischenKomposition(Leipzig,185067,5/18847)
S.Sechter:DieGrundstzedermusikalischenKomposition(Leipzig,18534)
S.Dehn:LehrevomContrapunkt,demCanonundderFuge(Berlin,1859,2/1883)
J.G.H.Bellermann:DerKontrapunkt(Berlin,1862,4/1901)
A.delaFage:Essaisdedipthriographiemusicale(Paris,1864)
E.F.Richter:LehrbuchdeseinfachenunddoppeltenKontrapunkts(Leipzig,1872Eng.trans.,1874)
L.Bussler:DerstrengeSatz(Berlin,1877,2/1905)
S.Jadassohn:MusikalischeKompositionslehre(Leipzig,18839)
H.Riemann:Lehrbuchdeseinfachen,doppeltenundimitierendenKontrapunkts(Leipzig,1888,3/1915Eng.
trans.,1904)
E.Prout:Counterpoint,StrictandFree(London,1890/R)
M.Haller:KompositionslehrefrpolyphonenKirchengesangmitbesondererRcksichtaufdieMeisterwerke
des16.Jahrhunderts(Regensburg,1891)
E.Prout:DoubleCounterpointandCanon(London,1891,manylateredns)
C.deSanctis:Trattatodicontrappuntoefuga(Milan,1895,2/1934)
T.Dubois:Traitdecontrepointetdefugue(Paris,1901)
F.Draeseke:DergebundeneStyl:LehrbuchfrKontrapunktundFuge(Hanover,1902)
P.Goetschius:Counterpoint(NewYork,1902,5/1915)
H.Riemann:GrosseKompositionslehre,i:DerhomophoneSatz(BerlinandStuttgart,1902,2/1912)ii:Der
polyphoneSatz(BerlinandStuttgart,1903,2/1912)iii:DerOrchestersatzundderdramatische
Gesangstil(BerlinandStuttgart,1913)
B.E.Scholz:LehrevomKontrapunktunddenNachahmungen(Leipzig,1904)
C.H.Kitson:TheArtofCounterpointanditsApplicationasaDecorativePrinciple(Oxford,1907,2/1924)
S.Krehl:Kontrapunkt(Leipzig,1908)
S.I.Taneyev:Podvizhnoykontrapunktstrogogopisma[Invertiblecounterpointinthestrictstyle](Leipzigand
Moscow,1909Eng.trans.,1962)
P.Goetschius:ExercisesinElementaryCounterpoint(NewYork,1910)
H.Schenker:NeuemusikalischeTheorienundPhantasien,ii/1(Vienna,1910)ii/2(Vienna,1922)
A.O.Halm:VonzweiKulturenderMusik(Munich,1913,3/1947)
F.Corder:TheDifficultiesofCounterpoint,PMA,xl(191314),113
J.Wolf:EinBeitragzurDiskantlehredes14.Jahrhunderts,SIMG,xv(191314),50434
E.Kurth:GrundlagendeslinearenKontrapunkts(Berne,1917,5/1956)
W.Hohn:DerKontrapunktPalestrinasundseinerZeitgenossen(Regensburg,1918)
E.Kurth:ZurStilistikundTheoriedesKontrapunkts,ZMw,i(191819),17684
H.Riemann:GeschichtederMusiktheorieimIX.XIX.Jahrhundert(Berlin,2/1921/REng.trans.ofptsiii,
1962/R,andptiii,1977)
R.O.Morris:ContrapuntalTechniqueinthe16thCentury(Oxford,1922)
H.Grabner:DerlineareSatz(Stuttgart,1925,2/1961)
K.Jeppesen:DerPalestrinastilunddieDissonanz(Leipzig,1925Eng.trans.,1927,2/1946)
R.O.Morris:FoundationsofPracticalHarmonyandCounterpoint(London,1925)
C.Koechlin:Prcisdesrglesducontrepoint(Paris,1926Eng.trans.,1927)
H.Roth:ElementederStimmfhrung(Stuttgart,1926)
C.H.Kitson:InvertibleCounterpointandCanon(London,1927)
C.S.Macpherson:StudiesintheArtofCounterpoint(London,1928)
H.Angls:Dostractatsmedievalsdemsicafigurada,MusikwissenschaftlicheBeitrge:Festschriftfr
JohannesWolf,eds.W.Lott,H.OsthoffandW.Wolffheim(Berlin,1929/R),612
C.L.Seeger:OnDissonantCounterpoint,MM,vii/4(192930),2531repr.inClassicEssaysonTwentieth
CenturyMusic,ed.R.KostelanetzandJ.Darby(NewYork,1996),17984
P.S.H.Gnther:ModernePolyphonie(Berlin,1930)
K.Jeppesen:Kontrapunkt(Vokalpolyfoni)(Copenhagen,1930,3/1962Eng.trans.,1939)
F.T.Arnold:TheArtofAccompanimentfromaThoroughBassasPractisedinthe17thand18thCenturies
(London,1931/R)
R.W.Wood:ModernCounterpoint,ML,xiii(1932),31218
P.Nalli:RegulaecontrapunctisecundumusumRegniSiciliae,ArchiviostoricoperlaSiciliaorientale,xxxix
(1933),27792
F.Wright:TheEssentialsofStrictCounterpoint(Brooklyn,NY,1935)
M.F.Bukofzer:GeschichtedesenglischenDiskantsunddesFauxbourdonsnachdentheoretischenQuellen
(Strasbourg,1936/R)
L.K.Feininger:DieFrhgeschichtedesKanonsbisJosquindesPrez(Emsdetten,1937)
T.Georgiades:EnglischeDiskanttraktateausdererstenHlftedes15.Jahrhunderts(Wrzburg,1937)
P.Hindemith:UnterweisungimTonsatz,i:TheoretischerTeil(Mainz,1937,2/1940Eng.trans.ofiiiasCraft
ofMusicalComposition,1942,2/1948)
E.T.Ferand:DieImprovisationinderMusik(Zrich,1938)
R.H.Robbins:BeitrgezurGeschichtedesKontrapunktsvonZarlinobisSchtz(diss.,U.ofBerlin,1938)
J.N.David:DerKontrapunktindermusikalischenKunst,BJb,xxxvi(1939),5061
V.Ferroni:Corsodicontrappuntoefuga,ed.E.Pozzoli(Milan,1939)
A.T.Merritt:SixteenthCenturyPolyphony:aBasisfortheStudyofCounterpoint(Cambridge,MA,1939)
E.J.Dent:TheTeachingofStrictCounterpoint,MR,i(1940),20113
E.Krenek:StudiesinCounterpoint(NewYork,1940)
R.Casimiri:TeodonodeCaprio,nonTeodoricodeCampo,teoricomusicaleitalianodelsecoloXV:unsuo
trattoinedito,NA,xix(1942),3842,938
E.Pepping:DercantusfirmusSatz,DerpolyphoneSatz,i(Berlin,1943,2/1950)
R.B.Henning:TheUseofContrapuntalTechniquesbyContemporaryComposers(diss.,RadcliffeCollege,
1947)
E.Krenek:ADiscussionoftheTreatmentofDissonancesinOckeghem'sMassesasComparedwiththe
ContrapuntalTheoryofJohannesTinctoris(StPaul,MN,1947)
A.I.McHose:TheContrapuntalHarmonicTechniqueofthe18thCentury(NewYork,1947)
W.Piston:Counterpoint(NewYork,1947)
A.Bush:StrictCounterpointinthePalestrinaStyle(London,1948)
C.W.Fox:ModernCounterpoint:aPhenomenologicalApproach,Notes,vi(19489),4662
H.LemacherandH.Schroeder:LehrbuchdesKontrapunkts(Mainz,1950)
B.Blacher:EinfhrungindenstrengenSatz(Berlin,1953)
M.Hoffman:AStudyofGermanTheoreticalTreatisesoftheNineteenthCentury(diss.,U.ofRochester,
1953)
K.Sikorski:Kontrapunkt(Warsaw,19537)
J.Hein:DieKontrapunktlehrebeidenMusiktheoretikernim17.Jahrhundert(diss.,U.ofCologne,1954)
H.Scare:TwentiethCenturyCounterpoint(London,1954)
V.Soudres:Lesensactueldelapensecontrapuntique:inventairedestechniquesredactionnelles,
Polyphonie,nos.910(1954),516
P.Hamburger:StudienzurVokalpolyphonie,i(CopenhagenandWiesbaden,1956)iiinDAM,iv(19645)
C.V.Palisca:VincenzoGalilei'sCounterpointTreatise:aCodeforthesecondapratica,JAMS,ix(1956),81
96
E.Pepping:bungenimdoppeltenKontrapunktundimKanon,DerpolyphoneSatz,ii(Berlin,1957)
M.Thaling:DerKontrapunktbeiMozart(diss.,U.ofBasle,1957)
H.K.Andrews:AnIntroductiontotheTechniqueofPalestrina(London,1958)
J.M.Chomiski:Historiaharmoniiikontrapunktu(Krakw,1958)
E.Krenek:TonalCounterpoint(NewYork,1958)
T.W.Adorno:DieFunktiondesKontrapunktsinderneuenMusik,Klangfiguren:MusikalischenSchriften,i
(Berlin,1959)
A.Seay:PaolodaFirenze:aTrecentoTheorist,L'ArsNovaitalianadelTrecentoI:Certaldo1959,11840
S.Hermelink:Dispositionesmodorum:dieTonarteninderMusikPalestrinasundseinerZeitgenossen
(Tutzing,1960)
E.Rubbra:Counterpoint:aSurvey(London,1960)
R.Schltterer:StrukturundKompositionsverfahreninderMusikPalestrinas,AMw,xvii(1960),4050
C.Dahlhaus:ZurTheoriedesklassischenKontrapunkts,KJb,xlv(1961),4357
R.L.Crocker:Discant,Counterpoint,andHarmony,JAMS,xv(1962),121
C.Dahlhaus:BachundderlineareKontrapunkt,BJb,xlix(1962),5879
C.Dahlhaus:DomenicoBelliundderchromatischeKontrapunktum1600,Mf,xv(1962),31540
C.Dahlhaus:DieNotaCambiata,KJb,xlvii(1963),115121
A.Schoenberg:PreliminaryExercisesinCounterpoint,193650,ed.L.Stein(London,1963)
A.Seay:TheLibermusicesofFlorentiusdeFaxolis,MusikundGeschichte/MusicandHistory:Leo
SchradezumsechzigstenGeburtstag(Cologne,1963),7195
E.Apfel:BeitrgezueinerGeschichtederSatztechnikvonderfrhenMotettebisBach(Munich,19645)
C.Dahlhaus:UntersuchungenberdieEntstehungderharmonischenTonalitt(Kassel,1968)
H.EggebrechtandF.Zaminer:Adorganumfaciendum(Mainz,1970)
K.J.Sachs:ZurTraditionderKlangschrittLehre:dieTextemitderFormelSicantusascenditundihre
Verwandte,AMw,xxviii(1971),23370
E.Apfel:GrundlageneinerGeschichtederSatztechnik(Saarbrcken,1974)
K.J.Sachs:DerContrapunctusim14.und15.Jahrhundert:UntersuchungenzumTerminus,zurLehreund
zudenQuellen(Wiesbaden,1974)
J.Rothgeb:StrictCounterpointandTonalTheory,JMT,xix(1975),26084
P.P.Scattolin:Laregoladelgradonellateoriamedievaledelcontrappunto,RIM,xiv(1979),1174
F.Rempp:DieKontrapunkttraktateVincenzoGalileis(Cologne,1980)
K.J.Snyder:DietrichBuxtehude'sStudiesinLearnedCounterpoint,JAMS,xxxiii(1980),54464
D.delaMotte:Kontrapunkt(Munich,1981)
E.Apfel:DiskantundKontrapunktinderMusiktheoriedes12.bis15.Jahrhunderts(Wilhelmshaven,1982)
K.J.Sachs:Contrapunctus/Kontrapunkt(1982),HMT
R.Groth:DiefranzsischeKompositionslehredes19.Jahrhunderts(Wiesbaden,1983)
K.J.Sachs:DieContrapunctusLehreim14.und15.Jahrhundert,DiemittelalterlicheLehrevonder
Mehrstimmigkeit,GeschichtederMusiktheorie,ed.F.Zaminer,v(Darmstadt,1984),161256
B.Cooper:EnglischeMusiktheorieim17.und18.Jahrhundert,ibid.,141314
W.Seidel:FranzsischeMusiktheorieim16.und17.Jahrhundert,ibid.,4140
R.Kramer:GradusadParnassum:Beethoven,SchubertandtheRomanceofCounterpoint,19CM,xi
(19878),10720
K.W.GmpelandK.J.Sachs:DasManuskriptGirona91undseinContrapunctusTraktat,AMw,xlv
(1988),186205
R.Groth:ItalienischeMusiktheorieim17.Jahrhundert,ItalienischeMusiktheorieim16.und17.Jahrhundert:
AntikenrezeptionundSatzlehre,GeschichtederMusiktheorie,ed.F.Zaminer,vii(Darmstadt,1989),307
79
F.Rempp:ElementarundSatzlehrevonTinctorisbisZarlino,ibid.,39220
L.Rogers:Stravinky'sAlternativeApproachtoCounterpoint(diss.,PrincetonU.,1989)
E.Schroeder:DissonancePlacementandStylisticChangeintheFifteenthCentury:Tinctoris'sRulesand
Dufay'sPractice,JM,vii(1989),36689
E.Seidel:ZurKontrapunktlehrevonHeinrichBellermann,PalestrinaunddieIdeederklassischen
Vokalpolyphonieim19.Jahrhundert:Frankfurt1987,23141
J.Lester:HistoryofCompositionalTheoryinthe18thCentury(Cambridge,MA,1992)
W.Braun:DeutscheMusiktheoriedes15.bis17.Jahrhunderts,ii:vonCalvisiusbisMattheson,Vom
MagisterundSchulkantorzumvollkommenenKapellmeister,GeschichtederMusiktheorie,ed.F.Zaminer,
viii(Darmstadt,1994)
E.Schwind:KadenzundKontrapunkt:zurGeschichtederKompositionslehreca.1470ca.1570(diss.,U.of
Freiburg,1996)
CopyrightOxfordUniversityPress20072013.

Grove Counterpoint

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Grove Counterpoint

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Oxford Music Online

Grove Music Online

1. Discant of the 13th and 14th centuries.

2. Early note-against-note writing.

3. Treatises of the 14th and 15th centuries.

5. Three-part composition in the 15th century.

7. Composition in four or more parts.

9. Zarlino and aspects of dissonance treatment.

10. Galilei and his innovations, 158791.

11. 16thcentury double counterpoint.

12. The term counterpoint after 1600.

13. Theory after 1700.

14. Free style: licentious and harmonic

16. The Classical and Romantic eras.

17. 20th century.

Вам также может понравиться