# An essay about contrast in music



## StevenOBrien

I hope this doesn't come across as spammy in any way, but I've written an essay on the importance of contrast in music to me, and I thought some of you here might be interested in having a gander at it. A lot of the compositional feedback I give here and elsewhere is related to the lack of contrast within the piece they've posted, so I thought it would be a good idea to talk about that subject in particular.

http://www.64digits.com/users/index.php?userid=Stevenup7002&cmd=comments&id=501289

I'm not formally trained in any way, I'm pretty much entirely self taught, so some of the things I have to say may seem questionable at times, but hopefully you'll find it somewhat useful in places.

I'd like to write more of these "lessons", but only if people are interested, so if you find it useful and want to read more, please let me know .

Also, this is my first time really writing anything educational like this, so if you have any feedback for me, it would be much appreciated. Is it decent advice or am I horribly misleading people? Let me know .

Enjoy,
-Steven


----------



## Kopachris

Good article, though it presents no new ideas. It could use some expansion, and some of the ideas are a bit simplified or misleading, but the essay is fundamentally correct.


----------



## StevenOBrien

Kopachris said:


> Good article, though it presents no new ideas. It could use some expansion, and some of the ideas are a bit simplified or misleading, but the essay is fundamentally correct.


Thanks for reading! Would you mind being more specific about which parts you feel may be problematic?


----------



## Kopachris

Mostly, the term "contrasting middle section" has a definite meaning in music theory; specifically, the contrast is created by a focus on dominant harmony, regardless of any other contrasts (texture, melodic/motivic material, etc.). Easy fix: leave out the word "middle." The term "contrasting section" is ambiguous enough to refer to a subordinate theme, a development section, an interior theme, or a true contrasting middle section (of either a small ternary theme or a full ternary form movement). In your section about microscopic contrast, some mention of how melodic variation is derived from harmonic processes and just what effect that has would be useful. For example, a sequence is usually used harmonically to reach some goal harmony and is often associated with a function of continuation. As another example, Mozart likely returned to the original melodic material to form a structural boundary--so that the original+variation could be treated as a single unit (known as a "basic idea").

Regarding your analysis of "Eine Kleine Nachtmusik": Your analysis of variation is fine, but you don't provide any information about the structural implications of what Mozart does, and you used some terminology incorrectly. The first four bars of the movement (which you excluded from your analysis) are the introduction section of the main theme, and can be dismissed just fine (as you did--no argument there). The next four bars consist of a basic idea (supported by tonic harmony) and its exact repetition, forming a presentation phrase. What you call a "lead in" is actually a continuation phrase (thus, the main theme is a sentence), and what you call a "contrasting middle section" is actually a couple codettas attached to the main theme, preparing for the transition to the subordinate theme. Also, you have the viola and the second violin mixed up. The Violin II part is the 16-note tremolo.

Just my thoughts.


----------



## StevenOBrien

Kopachris said:


> Mostly, the term "contrasting middle section" has a definite meaning in music theory; specifically, the contrast is created by a focus on dominant harmony, regardless of any other contrasts (texture, melodic/motivic material, etc.). Easy fix: leave out the word "middle." The term "contrasting section" is ambiguous enough to refer to a subordinate theme, a development section, an interior theme, or a true contrasting middle section (of either a small ternary theme or a full ternary form movement). In your section about microscopic contrast, some mention of how melodic variation is derived from harmonic processes and just what effect that has would be useful. For example, a sequence is usually used harmonically to reach some goal harmony and is often associated with a function of continuation. As another example, Mozart likely returned to the original melodic material to form a structural boundary--so that the original+variation could be treated as a single unit (known as a "basic idea").
> 
> Regarding your analysis of "Eine Kleine Nachtmusik": Your analysis of variation is fine, but you don't provide any information about the structural implications of what Mozart does, and you used some terminology incorrectly. The first four bars of the movement (which you excluded from your analysis) are the introduction section of the main theme, and can be dismissed just fine (as you did--no argument there). The next four bars consist of a basic idea (supported by tonic harmony) and its exact repetition, forming a presentation phrase. What you call a "lead in" is actually a continuation phrase (thus, the main theme is a sentence), and what you call a "contrasting middle section" is actually a couple codettas attached to the main theme, preparing for the transition to the subordinate theme. Also, you have the viola and the second violin mixed up. The Violin II part is the 16-note tremolo.
> 
> Just my thoughts.


Good feedback! I've changed it slightly. The role of harmony that you speak of would be good to cover in a future blog.


----------

