Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum Classical Sonata Analysis

[ETA: oy... the post to which I was replying vanished. Consider the first four paragraphs here a conversation with the ether.]

There is a difference between "sonata analysis" and "sonata form analysis". As Richard has pointed out, not every movement in a sonata is in "sonata form" (or "sonata allegro form", as I often (usually?) hear it called).

Admittedly, we have wandered farther than even movements in sonatas, and as you say not always taken the time to carefully explain the different forms, or to name when we were moving from one form to another.

Regarding separate threads or one thread: every time the subject comes up, almost everyone except for the few stalwarts on this thread prefers a new thread per piece (or possibly per small group of related pieces, I might argue, but I don't have any evidence for that looser restriction). So I think that's the way we should go.

There are a few massively long-running threads in the ABF which are perhaps exceptional (Alfred's, Chopin Lovers, Rostosky's Serious Thread, Jazz), but since we on the analysis threads are always hunting for new participants, I think we should make the barriers to entry as low as possible, and not count on replicating the success of the long threads.

[back to a poster whose posts are still here]

Polyphonist, although we can choose a piece to focus on for the next thread, we are not usually so restricted as to choose a specific topic about that piece. Each of us has different areas that we tend to pay attention to in analysing a piece, and everyone reading brings different strengths and weaknesses, and these are learning threads that are meant to be inviting to beginners. So we tend to take the time to delve into the basics of whatever topic or topics it turns out needs the basics gone over.

That said, perhaps it would be more inviting to beginners if, in addition to a piece, we had some restricted focus about that piece. (I would chafe and want to start a second "no-holds barred" thread about the piece, though.) Is there a piece and topic you would propose?

Another way of organizing things might be to spin off separate threads for the music theory topics that need to be delved into in order to apply them to pieces. That hasn't usually seemed practical in the past, because all the topics intertwine and it's hard to pin them down into separate threads. But perhaps you can see a way to organize it, at least as a starting point. I wouldn't like to see discussion choked off when intertwined tangents emerge, however.

What piece (or topic) would people like to take up?

What about going back and taking another look at the Moonlight Sonata? The 2nd. movement or continuing with the first.

I'd like a separate thread for each piece with no holds barred on the diversification of the topic. There are two things that I think are important and relevant to the discussion. One is the harmonic analysis because it helps so much in both understanding music and its historical context and because it makes memorising so much easier.

The other is, if it's appropriate, the very practical matter of getting to play the bloody thing and for that you need a lot of help from listening, analysing, sharing thoughts and fingerings, and discussing what the music means, conveys; it's emotional content and our reaction to that.

I've been working with my son a lot recently and he's getting through Beyer Op. 101 but the difference between an exercise he works with me and an exercise he works on his own is night and day (though it is getting better). He plays the exercises like a scale, one note following another. When we work an exercise together we get every phrase marked out, every phrase has a climax that every note builds to or comes down from, the piece as a whole has a similar climax, the wrist leads the hand toward the climaxes and lifts out of them. The melody "sings". We need help drawing out the music. It takes time to get this on our own.

I'd like a single thread for the overall topic. Analysis takes a good bit of time if it's to be done thoroughly enough for me and it's best to consider the music over a number of days. I don't want to see a dozen threads popping up dealing with a dozen different pieces where I have to pick and choose which ones I can deal with and which ones I can't.

This particular thread also has a continuing idea. I'd like to see it through with a Beethoven sonata, one of Schubert's, maybe, or a brief discussion of his Wanderer Fantasy, which leads on to what, for me, is the pinnacle of sonata writing, Liszt's B minor masterpiece.

Keeping to the one thread is the easiest way for me to keep all the sidebar topics in an appropriate place, that gradually build up to the discussion at hand without losing anyone in the technicalities. In the one thread we discuss the theory pertaining to the topic at hand - what better way to learn it?

aTallGuyNH just recently brought up the subject of fingering in Clair De Lune and it has a restricted interest but the topic of fingering would be really useful in some of Bach's work appropriate to the ABF. Such practicalities don't seem right in this thread but I see the benefits not only of discussing fingering but also ways of learning a piece, ways of practising different passages in it and comparing approaches across a wider number of pianists. And why not analyse, harmonically, it at the same time?

So, ideally I'd like to finish this with Jeff, who seems keen to continue, and anyone else who wants to join in and then maybe start afresh with a new thread per piece but lift any restriction as to the extent of the discussion or the choice of music, and if more threads are started than I can cope with at least I can decide which ones to simply let go.

I'm also happy to continue this thread ad infinitum despite the inadequacy of its name. I'd like to clear away the last vestiges of topic restriction and misunderstanding without having to start a new thread. We started out with the Moonlight sonata and over a number of threads settled on sonatas (because that form became all pervasive and because the process used in analysing sonata form works across all other forms) but I never meant or understood it to be restricted to the classical era, sonatas in particular, or analysis in a strict or narrow sense.

We still never got back to the Moonlight and understood or discussed WHY it is so damn popular. All we did is find out that it's loosely based on sonata form and that it moves from this key to that - just like any other sonata type piece. How does it appeal to our emotions so universally? What makes it work? This is where I really wanted to go.

l would be interested in a discussion about the moonlight sonata. Don't know that I will be able to follow everything but I will try. I'll first go back and find the discussions about this sonata in this thread.

The more the merrier!

Moonlight Sonata wasn't discussed yet in this thread. It was discussed in a precursor thread (which I can't find right now... maybe I'll be able to turn it up later).

I hope that you will ask questions as we go along through it. That tells us what to spend more time exploring and explaining. Otherwise it's easy to just assume incorrectly that everyone knows everything already and just barrel ahead. So people's questions help the thread be better for everyone.

[ETA: Oh look, I think I found it: Moonlight Sonata First Mvmnt study thread]

I would like a thread called "classical sonata analysis" to be about sonatas. Since this thread is in the adult beginner forum, where it is assumed that people don't yet have knowledge about things, then if we are featuring a piece that has a particular musical form, then it would be good to know about that form just like it was done for "sonata form".

What threw me in this thread was when pieces appeared, and I tried to find sonata form in them and couldn't find it, because they weren't in sonata form. They were in some other form. Once I knew about that form, I looked it up and learned about it, and then I could orient again.


That seems be going in the direction that I had in mind.

The decision to have a thread on sonata form was our collective decision. It is important to understand this form because other forms grow out of it. But above all, threads in forums stay forever. Somebody trying to learn about sonata form and then find music of all kinds of forms could get lost and confused. In fact, it happened to me when there was the sudden switch to music of other forms. I had studied only that one kind, and I was lost when the others came along.

All right, so what's going to be happening? Stricter harmonic analysis in this thread, and open discussion of each piece in a separate thread?


Great, let's look at a Beethoven sonata or the Liszt then! I would be a major contributor in that discussion.

Good points.

My suggestion is to take the following course of action:

1) Collectively decide in this thread what the next piece will be to study, and MAKE SURE EVERYONE AGREES.
2) Begin a new thread with a title like "Schubert D960 Analysis", or whatever the piece is.
3) Begin discussion in that thread. If an extra thread is needed, for whatever reason, just create it.
4) After finishing discussing that piece, announce in that thread that you are officially moving on to a new piece, and direct any new joiners back to this thread to help decide what it will be. Of course, discussion can still continue in that thread, but the main part of the group will have moved on.
5) Return to this thread, decide on a new piece, and repeat process.

I could see it moving beyond analysis (and analysis can be more than "harmonic analysis") but staying within the form. And yes, I'm aware that the form of a sonata contains forms other than "sonata form" within each of the movements. The Beethoven, Schubert and Liszt sound great.

My own learning got up to the early simpler dance forms, and then sonata form. In my own studies, there were simple sonatinas, and then Mozart and Beethoven - that's it so far. What I understood was that sonatas (and sonata form) started relatively simple, which makes it easy to recognize, and then it got stretched. For what I did myself, I saw this with Beethoven versus Mozart. I am imagining that it continues getting stretched, but if you start with simpler earlier things and then move to fancier later things, you won't get lost because you will grow with it. That is how I imagine the music developed. I haven't studied that far yet.

The reason that I wanted a discussion on a form to stay with that form, is that I found it enormously helpful to understand the framework of types of music for later following music of that type. If there are other musical forms, (there were one or two that popped into this thread), then I'd be interested in following them, and analyzing music that was in those other forms, in order to get a handle on those form types. I don't know how much of that there is.

In order to compromise, perhaps we can keep it in this thread, but after the agreement bold it as in Schubert D960 at the top of the page.

Well, I don't know if the Liszt would be a great choice, because it isn't in classical sonata form. Let's go for one of the Beethovens, for right now.

That sounds fine to me; my only concern is that potential new joiners may not feel comfortable joining in the middle of a thread, because they may not know about the system we have going.

That is possible. Otoh, most people these days know enough to look through a thread and see a pattern to follow. The other consideration is that the beginning of this thread sets out how sonata form works and this was set out very carefully. So someone coming in later who is just starting with the form will have a kind of "reference" and samples from simpler works to get him or her going.

All right, works for me. Without further ado, let's get started. Suggestions for a sonata to start off with, or should we continue Beethoven's 27/2 from earlier?

Thanks for this Pianostudent88! I'll likely fall far behind on any analysis thread, so don't worry about keeping pace for me. I just put a book on music theory on hold at the public library and can also refer back to the beginner analysis threads we had going. But quite sure i'm far behind the type of analysis that was going on here. So, I'll just work at the pace that i can and the rest of you can keep on with what you were doing.....

Perhaps we could start a side thread, once we know what topics you are learning about. Perhaps something like Shey's Totally Stuck [though stuck no more] thread, where we proceed through music theory topics at a slow pace, where the idea is to give time to absorb and experiment with everything before moving on.

If you do feel comfortable asking questions (or even just shoot me a PM saying "topic X is completely unknown to me!" or whatever) here then we will know what to think about finding a way to explain, either here and now, or later, or on another thread.

What do you know about music theory already?

I'm just passionate about music theory and analysis and want to share it with and encourage as many people as possible.

If everything we're talking about is beyond most people on ABF, then I'd rather that we slowed down and filled in the gaps, even if it takes a while. But we only know what the gaps are if people ask questions or point them out to us.

Yes; if anyone has any side questions or doesn't understand something we're discussing, please feel free to send a PM to keystring, PS88, or myself, or to all three of us. Questions are welcome. Just please don't ask them in this thread. Let's try to keep this thread as organized and on track as possible. PMs (or other threads) for other things, by all means.

And now, I repeat, let's try and decide on a sonata to look at.

Chopin, Beethoven, Schubert, Liszt, Rachmaninoff, all are fine for me.

Not a good idea, imho - depending (see below).

This is the adult beginner thread, and of its nature that means that basic knowledge underlying things will be missing. One of the purposes of these thread is to get at these core concepts and frameworks.

I know that your experience is in working with students who already have the necessary background, and you can teach them directly about music using that knowledge. For that kind of discussion, you would be better off in the Pianist forum, where such background is assumed. By its nature, a discussion here will have to go on to these "side issues" which are actually part of the learning process on the subject.

I suggest that anyone presenting a piece, who has knowledge of music, should consider ahead of time what new knowledge will be needed, and then gear his presentation accordingly. That takes some planning. I am writing here as a trained teacher, though I'm not the only one.

We should also pool our skills and experience. I'm used to working with core or foundational things, getting at the root of a thing, while others have advanced knowledge to give.

Information in PMs benefits only that person - though this is a judgment call. If something separate needs to be learned that is very separate, in that case there should be separate threads.

This is how the sonata analysis thread originated, in fact. We began by analyzing pieces, and discovered that people didn't have the background. So we started to introduce that background, and build things.

What would have been nice but it's been rejected, is if a new section were created that was only about theory and analysis. A section like the ABF is a section. Then we could have had "reference threads" that are stickied on things like theory rudiments, and various areas of theory.

Is there an order in which they get more complicated, or grow from one to the other, or something that would suggest some to be worked on earlier than others?