Mental Handle wrote:
Another example is Richard Wagner - there is of course not ONE
functional harmonic analysis although this music not as "far"
from Riemann function as Debussy for instance - but one can give
ONE b.c. analyis, which states the same (up to the variety of
different notations for the same situation). For the many ways
of perceive this as function, see:
A single chord... I think you can see there IS different perception.
Tristan chord analyzed as a French sixth with appoggiatura
and dominant seventh with passing tone in A minor.
Functional analyses include interpreting the chord's root as on:
the fourth scale degree (IV) of A minor...
the second degree (II) of A minor (B)...
as a secondary dominant (V/V=B...
F or B in A: Considering...
D'Indy (1903, p. 117), who analyses the chord as on IV
after Riemann's transcendent principle (as phrased by Serge
Gut: "the most classic succession in the world: Tonic, Subdominant,
Dominant" (1981, p. 150)) and rejects the idea of an added "lowered
seventh", eliminates, "all artificial, dissonant notes, arising
solely from the melodic motion of the voices, and therefore foreign
to the chord," finding that the Tristan chord is "no more than a
subdominant in the key of A, collapsed in upon itself melodically,
the harmonic progression represented thus:
D'Indy Tristan chord IV6 in IV6-V, as shown in Nattiez.
"This is the simplest in the world," just a sophisticated sixth chord.
Deliège, independently, sees the G♯ as an appoggiatura to A, describing that
in the end only one resolution is acceptable, one that takes the subdominant
degree as the root of the chord, which gives us, as far as tonal logic is
concerned, the most plausible interpretation ... this interpretation of the
chord is confirmed by its subsequent appearances in the Prelude's first
period: the IV6 chord remains constant; notes foreign to that chord vary.
Functional Harmony perception depends on the learned skills of
hearing in the same way arabic music theory perception does.