You've got the gist of it. Your description of what happens is pretty much what happens in other pieces from the classical period. In essence, you are given a theme or themes, and those themes are taken through a number of statements, restatements, transormations, etc. In a concerto, as you pointed out, there is a dialogue between the soloist and the orchestra centered around these themes. With a symphony or a solo work, the separate voices aren't always as clear. You may have opposition between different instruments in the orchestra (say, something gets stated in the strings and then the horns or woodwinds chime in) or different registers in an instrument. Or this dialogue may not happen at all. But if you listen to works from the classical period, you will always here a distinct melody or theme stated at the beginning of a movement. The composition will play around with the theme(s) in the tonic, that is the base key of the piece, the do in do-re-mi. Then a series of chord progressions will move the piece into the dominant or fifth, the so of do-re-mi-fa-so. The movement will usually explore statements and transfigurations of the theme(s) in other keys as well, but the bulk of the movement hovers in and around the dominant until it reolves itself back in the tonic, giving the movement a I-V-I arc. There are different forms for accomplishing, but all "Classical" music has this basic shape.
In the Romantic period, forms became less strictly defined and harmonic progressions strayed farther and farther away from this basic I-V-I. Listening to a piece from the late 19th century, it is easy to lose track of the harmonic movement. However, the Romantic works tended to have a more organic treatment of themes. Where as the Classical works presented a complete theme and developed it, Romantic works often fleshed out a theme from a germinal idea. That's one of the reasons Romantic works tend to be longer.
In the twentieth century, some composers abandoned the idea of the tonal (I-V-I, called tonal because it's centered around a tonic) system. Schoenberg, Berg, and Webern developed a rigorous musical system around sets of 12 unique tones and subsets thereof. Debussy also played around with 12-tone scales. Debussy, Ravel, and others played with different musical sonorities outside of tonal music and independent of the strict 12-tone (aka serial) school of music. Composers like Bartok, Stravinsky, and Ives often took folk music or other sounds and music and created new textures, rhythms, etc. The twentieth century was a very exciting time for musical innovation.
Nonetheless, the key in any musical style or period, IMO, is to allow yourself to listen to the different musical ideas put forth, whether distinct themes or special sonorities, and allow these ideas to mingle in your inner ear as the composer gradually works these ideas out for you. Yes, one can super-analyze these things, but I don't want to kill the emotional power and enjoyment of music by doing so. I think you already know how to listen to music. Some textures and styles simple require more careful listening until your ear and mind become more acclimated to them.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2005-04-05 15:39 (UTC)In the Romantic period, forms became less strictly defined and harmonic progressions strayed farther and farther away from this basic I-V-I. Listening to a piece from the late 19th century, it is easy to lose track of the harmonic movement. However, the Romantic works tended to have a more organic treatment of themes. Where as the Classical works presented a complete theme and developed it, Romantic works often fleshed out a theme from a germinal idea. That's one of the reasons Romantic works tend to be longer.
In the twentieth century, some composers abandoned the idea of the tonal (I-V-I, called tonal because it's centered around a tonic) system. Schoenberg, Berg, and Webern developed a rigorous musical system around sets of 12 unique tones and subsets thereof. Debussy also played around with 12-tone scales. Debussy, Ravel, and others played with different musical sonorities outside of tonal music and independent of the strict 12-tone (aka serial) school of music. Composers like Bartok, Stravinsky, and Ives often took folk music or other sounds and music and created new textures, rhythms, etc. The twentieth century was a very exciting time for musical innovation.
Nonetheless, the key in any musical style or period, IMO, is to allow yourself to listen to the different musical ideas put forth, whether distinct themes or special sonorities, and allow these ideas to mingle in your inner ear as the composer gradually works these ideas out for you. Yes, one can super-analyze these things, but I don't want to kill the emotional power and enjoyment of music by doing so. I think you already know how to listen to music. Some textures and styles simple require more careful listening until your ear and mind become more acclimated to them.