A.  Schoenberg rarely talked about his 12-tone compositions. The only time we got into it very deeply was his first lecture on 12-tones, which he gave in 1941 and is in printed form today, and when he showed me his work on the String Trio which he wrote in 1946. We discussed parts of some of his works but he never let me in on how he composed his 12-tone music. He kept it mostly to himself and let others describe it and analyze it. Our class discussions were on Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, Brahms and practically nothing on Schoenberg.

Q.  Schoenberg believed that the idea is the most important element in a work of art and that the idea will never parish. Bach's idea of counterpoint has proven this true. Has Schoenberg's idea of composition with 12-tones taken firm root in music history?

A.  His approach to non-tonal music was like creating a new world of music. His was music without key references or references to a tonic. He was not concerned with chord progressions that give you a sense of ending or release of tension. This was inevitable because of the accumulation of so many dissonances and chromaticism by late romantic composers such as Wagner, Richard Strauss and Debussy. Schoenberg's contribution to music has taken its proper place in history as an evolution from the music that preceded it.

Q. What makes Schoenberg's piano music distinctive?

A. It lacks any of the typical accompaniment figures of the 19th Century; no broken chords and very little use of the pedal. He didn't want anything to obscure the musical line and he was very interested in the polyphony of the lines. The melody may appear in any voice; upper, middle or lower. In a certain sense he is closer to Bach than to any other composer. I approach his music as I approach the most complex music of Bach.

Q. You took all of Schoenberg's classes; theory, harmony, counterpoint and composition. What was his approach as a teacher?

A. Schoenberg believed that the weightiest problem in teaching was that young geniuses make discoveries by themselves just by thinking and talented students learn from their education. He tried to find out what each student was capable of. He admitted to me that when he was a young teacher he over-taught. He taught everything he knew and you shouldn't do that. You should teach pupils what they need to know for their own development.

Q. What approach should a student take in learning a new piece?

A. I prefer the analytical approach, learning the piece as if you were the composer. Study the components of the piece; motifs, periods, sentences. Then begin to see the relationship of one part to another; the creation of a certain order. For example, compare what happens in measure 1 with what happens in measure 57 and understand why things happen as they do. Analyze the masters, Beethoven especially, because Beethoven can be explained more easily than the other masters as to form and harmony.

Q. When changes of style occur in the arts the difference between the old and the new can be confusing to audiences. What should they do to overcome their confusion?

A. The history of music is one continuous line. The latest is derived from what has gone before it. Some people become outraged at a new work because they can't find the connection with what has preceeded it. The clues are there and it is up to the listener to make the connection to what he/she is familiar with. By reading and listening more, the audience will have additional clues to help them understand. They will have more illumination and fascination with the new because they have connected with the old.

Q. You have had a life-long commitment to bringing new music to audiences. Have you witnessed a more adventuresome public to music of the 20th Century?

A. When I first started playing modern music as early as 1930, there weren't many people interested in it. I've looked back on some of the old programs and I can't find works by Bartok, Hindemith, Copland or any of those composers we know so well today. Because of recordings I think there's much more sympathy for new music. The audience is well aware that there will always be something presented that they don't understand at first. But they are willing to listen and be open to new listening possibilities. Today is different from the past. Music surrounds us all the time because of recordings, radio, television and the internet. We hear more music and we become more identified with it. There are so many kinds of modern music, some of which has direct appeal and some of which it takes two, three or more listenings to understand. Even the critics have decided to encourage rather than discourage modern music. I think these trends speak to a healthy future for music.