Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Schoenberg does have everything you need but you have to remember, it is only a book. It can present the information to you but the rest is up to you. If you really want to get to know forms, I would get hold of some scores of classical piano sonatas and analyse them according to the models you read about from Schoenberg. If you just read about forms you'll only ever have a superficial understanding of them, you need to be able to see them in action to fully understand them.

Posted

Schoenberg's Fundamentals will be useful only if you want to write and think like Schoenberg, whose vision imo was extremely narrow. He was interested in theory and methodology more than anything else. The Norton Scores, however, contain examples of music of all periods and styles. It is not a manifesto, but rather a compendium of what good composers have done over the years and why.

Posted

Schoenberg's Fundamentals will be useful only if you want to write and think like Schoenberg, whose vision imo was extremely narrow. He was interested in theory and methodology more than anything else. The Norton Scores, however, contain examples of music of all periods and styles. It is not a manifesto, but rather a compendium of what good composers have done over the years and why.

While I agree with you about studying scores, I disagree about Schoenberg. If you want to know the theory, you want to read that book. It won't make you write or think like anybody but yourself, it will simply explain how forms work.

  • Like 1
  • 4 weeks later...
Posted

Sorry to bump this old thread, but I have Schoenberg's book and I have learned a lot from it. The problem is some of the examples I have no idea which ones he is referring to. For example, on page 120, in the middle of the page, he refers to Op. 2/2-IV (m. 1-16). What the hell page is that on? If he says Ex. 36 a, I can flip through and find it with no problem. Also, for another example, in Chapter three Ex. 21, he shows an example of how to reduce and omit features from a motive, but does not mention what the original motive was. He does that a lot in the first few chapters.

If anyone has this book and knows what I'm talking about, I'd like some help.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...