Books on Form

Hi everyone,

I know there's already many threads on books, but I'm looking for something more specific; books on form, and I did check previous posts but didn't find much. Anyway, I recently purchased some books on theory, counterpoint, and other stuff but I realized that I'd forgotten to get books on form, so I was wondering if there are any books covering it that you'd reccomend. I pretty much want to learn it all, and if there's one book that covers most of it that would be good, but I'm also open to purchasing multiple books. Thanks! :)

Jackson

Two books.

Structural Functions of Harmony by Schoenberg

and

Structural Hearing: Tonal Coherence in Music

have fun :)

Schoenberg's Fundamentals of Composition also goes into form, though not real deeply. lots of examples.

You could start with some Haydn or Mozart piano sonatas, or symphonies.

Might not be the most detailed kind of musicological approach you're looking for...but what about Aaron Copland's "What to Listen For in Music"? He takes a simple, example based approach to lightly examine how form WORKS in a lot of the book, if I recall correctly. It's a good read either way.

you could try this book by Alan Belkin:A Practical Guide to Musical Composition, it focuses on form, and not forms, quite an interesting read.

its available as an online book as well as a free pdf download from his website :)...

Alan Belkin: A Practical Guide To Musical Composition

If you need a book to compose, don't compose.

Listen to some music, bud.

Yeah, because you should be able to glean all information aurally.

In fact, if you need a book to delineate 20th Century Harmony, you might as well give up.

Don't you DARE get a book on counterpoint either. You should be able to pick all of that up with no effort.

What are you trying to do? Learn? Psssh.

:whistling:

If you need a book to compose, don't compose.

Listen to some music, bud.

HOLD UP~~

The entire tradition of music teaching needs to be reformed, oh wow

Yeah...pretty much.

Yeah, uh.

Since you were apparently able to learn all the rules of fugue and everything there is to know about harmony from the 1600s up to the present day without reading a single word, I guess everyone else should quit and just wait for you to make your star debut. Huh?

Since the vox populi argument is so near and dear to you, I gotta say that I can think of a great many composers that the majority of the public thinks are far better than you who did, in fact, have to actually read and study to learn music and master their craft, lawl.

The guy asked for a book suggestion, not all this rebel bull talking about "don't read, listen to some symphonies and you'll be fine." If you can't help, then doooooon't post. ;)

ANYWAY books on form.

Belkin's book is good for the beginning composer, it doesn't go too in depth and shows a number of examples that clearly illustrate what he means.

Also William Cole's Form of Music covers a lot and it's cheap.

Yeah, uh.

Since you were apparently able to learn all the rules of fugue and everything there is to know about harmony from the 1600s up to the present day without reading a single word, I guess everyone else should quit and just wait for you to make your star debut. Huh?

I think you were misinterpreting what Nico is saying...

to write music doesn't require books and such. It simply requires a drive to create art. I'm sure the majority of tribal Indonesians do not read Fux's counterpoint manual as part of their musical education. To assume that you need books to learn composition is silly.

You don't need books on form to tell you how to correctly proportion music either.. by listening to music, you gain that compositional "ear".

And it is with that "ear" that you can mold forms. Instead of reading books and following their prescriptions "to the T".

Of course, if you want to follow a traditional approach... books would certainly be helpful.

I just think that a compositional "ear" is equally valuable to obtain.. and that is most easily gained through listening to music.

Most every major composer--as talented and driven as they were--spent decades learning their craft--from books, books and teachers, teachers, exercises, more exercises, score study.

Of course, to be fair, you can write in the 20th c. idiom after listening to 3 or maybe 4 pieces and purchasing some staff paper...;]

Yep! No, I meant something more along the lines of what Mael was saying. But I do lose sight of the fact that how I learned everything may not be the best way for everyone else, so I apologize for that assumption.

I see ;)

I'm needlessly agressive, sowwy.

Awwwww, everybody made up

Of course, to be fair, you can write in the 20th c. idiom after listening to 3 or maybe 4 pieces and purchasing some staff paper...;]

Don't make us sic SSC on you.

Just give me the order, I can't hold his leash forever. He's a barbaric mangy one.

Well, you can write some random notes on staff paper and call it "a piece in the 20th century idiom" (whatever that may be…). There's no way of telling it isn't, even though nobody might care much for the result, maybe not even yourself.

You can also write some random notes on staff paper and call it "a sloppily written piece in the style of Mozart, with lots of mistakes".

Well, you can write some random notes on staff paper and call it "a piece in the 20th century idiom" (whatever that may be

Hmm, I don't quite understand what you are getting at here. That composers of today no longer are worrying about deadines and the more tedious aspects of composing? Or that false romantic ideas of what it means to be an artist didn't already exist in 1800?

If you need a book to compose, don't compose.

Listen to some music, bud.

Just because your form may be poor doesn't mean you need to bring everyone else down with you.

Just sayin'.

Just because your form may be poor doesn't mean you need to bring everyone else down with you.

Just sayin'.

No. NO. NOOOOOOOOOOO.

Read the thread before posting, please!

Western Classical music is NOT the be-all, end-all type of music. There are quite a few other musical traditions.

You DO NOT NEED books to obtain a grasp of FORM. You NEED books to obtain mastery of TRADITIONAL WESTERN CLASSICAL COMMON PRACTICE form. (and a grasp can simply be found by listening to it!)

There's a difference between 'form' and 'forms' though, yeah? As in, 'I need to know how to use Sonata form', or 'I need to learn how to interpret and use form better'.

Those are two very different statements. The second concept is integral as a composer, I feel, and even as a musician in general.

While I agree that using your ear is important, I don't feel like it is very appropriate or respectful to respond to 'What are some books on form?' with 'You don't need a book, use your ear'.