Search the Community

Many classic forms were adapted in the 20th century. New ones were invented. Messiaen's musical world is amazing. Check what intervals are the best for him to build a cadence! Regarding the sonata, he says: "having written some absolutely regular sonata-allegros, we shall state that one thing in that form has become obsolete: the recapitulation. Then we shall try once more to keep what is most essential: the development. there are two in a sonata-allegro: the middle, modulating development; the terminal development, generally built over understood dominant and tonic pedals. We shall be able to write pieces made of this terminal development alone". And he gives this example from les Enfants de Dieu (from la Nativité du Seigneur): First element over a dominant pedal in B major and development A great fortissimo cry upon a sort of schema with augmentation of the theme A tender phrase, forming the conclusion, established over a tonic pedal in B major. You can hear this part here: In his writings, he gives additional examples of this kind of technique and new "free forms proceeding from the development of the sonata-allegro". Some thoughts about all this: Having in mind that tonality in Messiaen cannot be understood in strictly classic ways, he uses a contemporary technique (as Debussy did) to establish tonal centers and a relationship between them: the pedal tone. It's interesting how Messiaen is not interested at all in parts without development, ruling out at first glance the recapitulation ("obsolete") because it has no modulation nor development. It's also interesting how he takes only a section (or better said, the concept of a section) of the sonata-allegro, to build up his own coherent form. In my opinion, this is related to the big idea in Messiaen of "progressive music": non retrogradable rhythms or added values, non transposable modes... All of them have to be with that idea on not allowing the music to fall in the repetition patterns where classic music had rely on. This is just an example of what Messiaen did with forms. He talks about fugue, an other forms he was interested in, some of them fresh and new (Bird son), some old (plainchant). Is this concept interesting for you? For me, it is. It opens more possibilities of organising music material.

Hello, everyone. I am new to the forum and decided to share my most recent composition for solo piano in three part sonata form. I am looking forward to your reviews. This piece displays the current evolutionary stage of my musical language - where I'm at regarding expressive capabilities, structure, how I handle development and so on and so forth. I hope you enjoy or at least that it triggers an aesthetical response of some sort which in turn would mean that it has inherent artistic value. P.S. I put a bit of effort in producing a visually appealing score video too. It would definitely help my YouTube channel grow if you like, subscribe or leave a comment there. Petar Dimov

Hey Im writig a piano Concerto and have hit writers (Composers) block. i'm not convinced with the section at the end which would be the transition to my second subject. any advice welcome. ( i Know i haven't actually put the piano in the score.)

I had this idea come to mind a few days ago. What if I combine the Waltz and the Sonata into a single piece? Since I already wrote several sonatas, I figured I would emphasize the Waltz part of this piece by constantly having a waltz-like bassline. I have finished the exposition of this piece. I made the first theme be more scalar in nature and the second theme have more arpeggios to provide melodic contrast, since the bass couldn't really provide much contrast besides key, being a waltz and all that. For the transition, I started in F major and then went to C major and then went back and forth between C major and C minor until I finally resolved to Bb major for the second theme. What do you think of the waltz so far? I'm working on the development section right now. Somebody else, outside of this forum asked if I was writing a "waltz in the style of a sonata" or a "sonata in the style of a waltz" and I answered that I am writing a "waltz in the style of a sonata", thus the title of Valse Quasi una Sonata, which translates to Waltz almost like a Sonata. Valse Quasi una Sonata.mp3 Valse Quasi una Sonata.pdf

Hello everyone! I've just posted my latest (and hopefully greatest) work yet. It's a Sonata for Oboe and Piano, which I've beew working on for the past month. The first and second movement took me 3 days to write, altought I altered them quite a bit. The last movement actually took a few weeks, as I had to experimetn with polychords (I had never used them before). Also, thank's to @Monarcheon for posting the masterclass on polychords, that's what stroke my interest on them! After listening to it various times, the image of a warrior that was cast on to an adventure, in which he met various conditions and exotic creatures really fit the mood, so I decided to name the movements accordingly. So, here's the link to it! As always, feedback is greatly apreciated. Best wishes, Jean.

So I decided that since it might be a while before I get any further progress on it, that I would post what I have so far of my bagatelle. I am composing a bagatelle and it is turning out to be sort of a hybrid between your typical bagatelle and a sonata. However, even once the piece is finished, it would be too short for me to put Sonata in the title(5 minutes at most, that isn't long enough for an entire sonata). I mean, I guess I could call it the Sonata Bagatelle but then the title would be confusing. Here is how I was planning things out. I was planning to do it in rondo form. At first I thought of sticking to ABACA such as in Fur Elise. But the rondo form quickly expanded to be ABACABA, the typical form of a rondo in a sonata. But I was still planning on having 2 sections in the tonic. That is, until my melodic improvisation lead me somewhere else. This is really when the hybridization of the typical bagatelle and the sonata started happening. And it is why I am asking this question relating to bagatelles and sonata form. I will show both the general terms and the Sonata Form terms here. Here is the First Theme/A section of my bagatelle: And here is its motive division: As you can see, I have a lot of motives here. This means that I can have an extensive development without it being boring or completely unrelated sounding. Here are the motives: Red - Starting motive and its inversion Green - Second motive Blue - Triplet motive Purple - Dominant motive Orange - Scale motive Dark red - Cadential motive Here is my Second Theme/B section: And here is its motive division: As you can see, I have a single motive here, a scale step that descends through the theme. This means that the Second Theme/B section can't contribute as much to the Development/C section as the First Theme/A section can, but it is pretty typical for 1 theme to have more motives than another theme in a sonata form piece. With this, my bagatelle "Exposition" is in this form: ABA The C section, I am planning on having be in the parallel minor. So since I am in C major here, the C section would be in C minor. I have been told that my piece is getting too motivic to be called a bagatelle. But I thought bagatelles could very much be motivic. For example Bagatelle in C minor by Beethoven has a motive that has just 1 note extra but otherwise is almost exactly the Fate Motive. So I'm keeping bagatelle in the title of my piece, for now at least. I might change it to Sonatina if I think it is better suited as such after composing it. But here is what I have so far, the Exposition in ABA form and a short transition into the development. What do you think of it? Should I flush out my syncopated sounding bass line(I'm saying syncopated sounding because it isn't in the truest sense of the word, syncopated, but it sounds like it is) from simple arpeggiation to full blown chords? What about those left hand triplets in the B section/Second Theme? Should I continue those triplets instead of alternating triplets with rests? And is there a better way for me to transition to C minor than the fourth to fifth motion I have right now?

Hi all, Been working on this for a while as an exercise in sonata form and, specifically, development. Since it was an exercise, I kept the language very tonal so I didn't have to worry about dealing with more contemporary techniques. Would love to know what you think. Thanks!

What specifically do you do to plan out a development section in sonata form? Should the modulations and the order of the themes/fragments follow any sort of predesigned logic (other than 'mix them up')? The keys that should be used are mainly what's bothering me, mostly because my modulations tend to sound forced to me, especially in the development section.

Hi, I'm new here, so forgive me if I'm doing something wrong. I'm writing a sonata-form movement in Romantic style (Schubert, Brahms...). I've written: 1st theme (8+8 bars), ending on i (G min) transition (G min >> Eb) 8 bars of the 2nd theme (starts at bar 57), ending on V (Bb major chord) However, I'm stuck here. :dunno: I've just moved from a classical to a romantic style, and the proportions are bigger. I know I should write something looser and more lyrical here, and it should be roughly 50-60 bars long for balance. I could use more than 1 theme (?), and perfect cadences should be used sparsely. I tend to write very "marked" self-contained themes, like the 1st one, so my initial idea was to write another 8+8 antecedent/consequent. But I can't do this, I must include more material before the V-I and the codetta. Thus, I've written some "continuations" after the 1st 8 bars ending on V, as well as a climax based on that tune, and a little codetta... I don't know how to assemble all that stuff. I've checked out tons examples, but I'm kinda blocked. Any tips? What is your experience? Thanks!! :D