# problems with form.



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

I've tried my whole life to work in form to my music but the most form that seems to come is in theme and variations, and maybe my problem is that I just don't practice it in both my improvisations and my writing.


----------



## Crudblud (Dec 29, 2011)

Why think about form when you should be thinking about the music?


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

You could always just _abandon_ form completely. Schoenberg did that wonderfully in a few of his works.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

form?, what is that?


----------



## Philip (Mar 22, 2011)

form is the most important part of composition, especially for beginners. only masters should abandon it, like bruce lee in martial arts.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Have you done any analysis of form in existing works by other composers?


----------



## Manok (Aug 29, 2011)

I'm very good at analysis, just not so good at putting what I analyze in my own music.


----------



## StevenOBrien (Jun 27, 2011)

I recommend you read "Classical form" by William Caplin if you haven't already.


----------



## clavichorder (May 2, 2011)

StevenOBrien said:


> I recommend you read "Classical form" by William Caplin if you haven't already.


I recently, as in a few months ago, abandoned tonality and started breaking some rules, using whatever means to get to my destination. And things came out with form! That's neoclassicism for ya. Maybe you should try that? Or you could just try using your intuition. Just compose whatever you can.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

The qualifier first:
Here I'm being one of those "Do what I say, not what I (can or cannot) do." kind of folk 
Now....

You need a first-hand familiarity with form [textbook, theory or analysis familiarity is not true familiarity] if you want to work with it.
That means knuckling down and composing a simple sonata (or sonatina) Rondo, etc. --- and being utterly willing for it to be one very pure piece of crap (roll the R's if your work is 'classical' ~ everyone, now ~ _Crrrrrap_) - because odds of first time wild success are extremely low 

Working through the forms is the only way you will: 
1.) have familiarity enough to later conceive of a work which works 'in form'
2.) " " " to begin to come up with ideas which are stimulated, FIRST - or simultaneously, as suitable to / for a form.

I'm quite limited in the area, as much as I've studied, etc. Perhaps I am just 'less interested' in old forms. That said, some puzzling out any and all other elements which 'tie a piece together' (which may not be 'audible' but do 'hold it together') is also well worth your while.

through-composed 
progressive tonality 
set theory and earlier serialism (which needn't be atonal any more than 'serial' requires atonality - or the use of all twelve chromatic pitches) 
... are all good to listen to, look at, and ponder.

'Process' too: 
Some Renaissance forms
Modal counterpoint (I think more 'pliable' for something fresh sounding vs 18th century counterpoint)
18th century counterpoint
'Ivesian' counterpoint 
Stravinsky's "additive" technique
Repeated cell principle of the early minimalist style
Mono-thematicism, in conjunction with any of the above,
etc. 
... are all good for successfully creating their own forms on their own terms.

The Sonata Allegro / Symphony form is not dead, but it is generally thought that much of anything one could call 'contemporary' at all (some hard core 'ists' would also say 'modern') is not found in those forms, though principals from them are much in use in some contemporary music.

Good luck, and wish me the same.


----------

