How wonderful to have access to knowledge at this high calibre! Thanks for taking time to make this video, which I believe will be beneficial to music enthusiasts all around the globe!
Amazing!!! great presentation - precise, clear, direct and very helpful ! Even for amateurs like me it is understandable ( like every video from Seth) and very welcome! Thanks so much for your work and presentation!
I've been cruising through your harmony videos, but this is the stuff that I really need to get under my belt. I mostly write a capella choral music, so tend to just let the form such as it is evolve out of the text. I have however set myself the task of making a more symmetrical setting of a poem for one of my choirs, and this has been most instructive.
It's impossible to describe how music form changed my life, as a amateur musician. All i can say it was impossible to me to make an international thematic melody before i learn about it...And it's something NO ONE talk about on channels dedicated to self taught producers. It's baffling. And yes, i learned it from different channel, but still i get new knowledge here :) Thank you!
(5:06) That's the 4th movement of the Mozart symphony not the 1st. This is a great series of videos (Lesson10 onward is really fascinating stuff!), I just thought I had to point that out to feel smart.
Great job sir! Thank you for your hard work! Just wanted to let you know, though, that the musical excerpt provided on 5:15 of Mozart’s Symphony No. 25 is not movement I (as the video claims) but rather, movement IV.
Hi Kevin. Ugh-you're totally right. This was back in the days when I didn't read from a script, and somehow I let the typo in the caption above the score confuse me. It wouldn't bother me so much if the opening of Sym. 25 weren't so famous. What an embarrassing gaffe!
Thanks for your videos! In his book, William Caplin mentions that the antecedent or consequent of a period may be felt like a "mini-sentence". Along the same idea, would it be wrong to say that in your 8:30 Mozart 's example, the presentation phrase of that huge sentence sounds like a contrasting period?
Great question! Broadly speaking, the answer is "yes." A number of scholars, including some of Caplin's most successful students, have talked about this phenomenon in the music of the 1820s and later-i.e., the gigantic sentence whose presentation sounds like a period. I the case of Mozart's Gm symphony, I'd say the presentation sounds more like a parallel period than a contrasting one. But the broader point holds!
Hello Mr. Seth, Thanks for your excellent explanation that clears many sophisticated subjects for us. 1) At 6:35 in this video, the second bar is named the dominant seven (V7) while the chord has only three notes G, B, and D. Isn't it a dominant triad, not a dominant seven? 2) At 8:25 in this video, the last bar as PAC should include a dominant and then a tonic chord. But the note of the first part is G and B as the dominant part on G major, and a single G note in the 2nd part as the tonic chord. As I know, a dominant chord in G major is D, F, and A (and other similar combinations), but not G, and B. Would you mind explaining this concept? 3) At 11:50 in this video, the last bar as PAC should include a dominant and then a tonic chord. But it has only one single note F, is it PAC, that includes only a tonic note?
Great questions! Here are some answers: (1) The V7 at 6:35 is a typo. Should be V. (2) At 8:25, I'm not sure what you mean: the last beat of m. 9 has a full V7 chord (DF#AC) resolving on the downbeat of m. 10 to G/B (an incomplete tonic "triad," which is very common). (3) At 11:50, we see a very common situation, which is the omission of complete chords at a PAC, in favor of bare octaves on the dominant and tonic notes. (I explain this roughly 8 minutes into Lesson 11, if you're curious to see other examples.)
Thanks for the great content! I'm curious how we can use this information to compose classical music eventually. The theory topics seem really fragmented, and I'm struggling to see how they could be turned into something useful. It's also tough because I can't hear these complex parts and notes in my head. Do you think we need to train our ears more before moving forward? And could you please suggest some supplementary materials for extra practice on these concepts?
Great, important questions, and hard ones to answer quickly! It may help to know that I'm making this video series as the "textbook" for conservatory classes I teach in person, so you're only seeing one aspect of the pedagogy. The theoretical stuff is foundational, of course. But the rubber meets the road in the ear training, which can't be rushed. I have my students singing and playing the piano as much as possible, to give a sonic reality to the stylistic principles. If you're hoping to compose in the classical style one day, I'd recommend a three-pronged approach. First, listen and internalize as much music as possible. Develop an intuitive sense for what's conventional and what's unusual. Second, learn how the music works on a technical level. Learn the names for things. Know what happens and what doesn't, how harmony and phrasing are organized locally and over the long haul. Third, roll up your sleeves and do as much analysis as possible. And by "analysis," I absolutely do NOT mean "chord labeling." I mean listening with and without scores and learning to recognize the basic patterns and grammar. (An experienced analyst of this music doesn't usually need to go chord-by-chord; they can follow the bass line and infer the harmony they hear above it.) In terms of additional resources: alas, if I thought there were really good materials out there, I wouldn't be making my own! I'm self-taught, and a lot of my teaching aims to help students experience the same little, incremental moments of discovery and heightened awareness that got me where I am today. But it takes time...a lot of it! It's a labor of love, to be sure.
Really thanks so much for your video. I just finished my music theory class today and the knowledge which I do not understand so clearly in the class. Your video is Useful and detailed!!!!
That's really great, sorry I will repeat myself but I learnt those by myself, using old french books by Vincent d'Indy, but I never had the chance to actually know if I understood it clearly, and no one was able to respond to questions I might have..plus I'm not a good piano player at all ; this was until I found your channel :p so thank you again for all your incredible work !! Jazz ressources are commonly found on the internet but not classical ;
Maestro: Thank you for the privilege of your time and genius. It is clear, transparent and to the point; unobstructed by legalism that only confuse. Please do not stop and again thank you. Do you have any "instructional sheets" that can aid in the studies? Again please accept my sincerely gratitude and please do not cease to do what you do for us "amateurs." With respect and gratitude, R
You're much too kind! I'm delighted that you like the channel, though. Unfortunately, most of the supporting materials I make for the videos are activities I do in class with my students. So they're not usually in a format to be shared (e.g., pdfs or other print materials). That said, I did make a multimedia flashcard set this year to help my students hear sentences and periods by ear. It lives in the "Brainscape" app, and if you'd like to try it out, you can use this link to enroll in the "class." www.brainscape.com/p/2RYTH-LH-CFXQ9
Hi! May I ask another question, please? 4) At 14:30, how and where from the note sheet has the composer modulated from C minor to G minor or other keys?
Sure: Bill Caplin's "Analyzing Classical Form" and Jim Hepokoski's "Sonata Theory Handbook" are relatively recent publications that are (1) written by leading people in the field and (2) designed for folks who aren't career academics. Neither is perfect, and the two famously disagree on many things. (They used to debate each other publicly for sport, basically.) But each is a solid starting point if you're willing to read and listen a lot.
This is pedagogy of a high order. Thank you for all your work. I like especially you clear, illustrative graphics. I was raised on the Laitz book on harmonic theory, which also goes through sentences and periods. One question I have always had: in what sense is a sentence a “sentence” and a period a “period”? You could make a good case that the “period”, with its antecedent and consequent, is a sentence, as generally understood. Put otherwise, the names are odd. You thoughts?
Like so many things in music theory, these terms are sort of accidental bedfellows, not the product of any kind of logical, systematic process. I'm pretty sure that "period" is the older of the two names in English; it probably comes from the idea that something "periodic" happens repeatedly-thus the application to a model that pairs one phase with another. (Note, however, that there is *no* consensus over the past century re: the necessary/sufficient conditions to have a "period." Some people believe that without specifically parallel phases, you don't have a period, etc.) "Sentence" is a more recent acquisition in English. If I recall correctly, the form was identified by Schoenberg as a "Satz"-a German word with roughly six billion meanings, one of them being "sentence." It was then popularized by his student Erwin Ratz. But it wasn't really a mainstream English term (i.e., "sentence") until the end of the 20th century, though. TLDR: my impression is that there's no rhyme or reason behind the names sentence or period, and the fact that they both refer to grammatical/lexical structures in the English language is just a coincidence.
I stumbled across your channel after googling "lament bass harmonisation" and I'm incredibly glad I did. These are videos of remarkable quality; thanks so much for making them. I'm working my way through them all. I realise that you specialize in classical period theory; but I would love a video comparing and contrasting baroque and classical treatments of harmony and phrase structure; a big topic, but it would be great. Anyway, once again, thanks for such brilliant material!
At 6:35, the chord in the second bar is written as V7, but we don’t see the seventh in this bar. Is it a typo or is it because the F notes in the surrounding bars can affect our judgement of the chord in this bar as well?
Hi Seth and thank you for the amazing tutorial video . A period can not go to another degree except V to tonic ? Can’t go for example from IV to I or from II to tonic ? Nocturne op.9 no.2 by Chopin ends up with a PAC two times and I doubt if I can consider those first 8 measure as a sentence , I think is a period but based on your explanation the first four measure should be a half cadence or imperfect cadence ! Then why the nocturne op.9 no.2 is opposite!? ( two perfect authentic cadence in a row ) Please give me your advice I really want the answer 💗
Hi Dante! One does sometimes come across periods with unusual cadence schemes in the classical era. Just this morning, I found a Haydn period where the first phrase ended with an IAC and the second with a HC. I also recall hearing periods where both phrases ended in half cadences-which feels fairly strange to me. (Are they "really" periods at all!?!?) However, in Chopin op. 9/2, I don't think the opening 8 bars are best understood as antecedent + consequent. It's better, I think, to understand that movement as a rounded binary form with written-out repeats. So instead of two sections-A and BA'-surrounded by repeats, Chopin simply writes them out in full, but with lots of new embellishment in the melody: AABA'BA'. (A is mm. 1-4, repeated in 5-8. The first B section is mm. 9-12 and the first A' is 13-16. These then repeat immediately, with variation.) In this understanding of the form, mm. 1-4 and 5-8 are "supposed to be" the same music rather than complementary halves of a parallel period. The fact that Chopin varies the theme on the second sounding is just a bonus!
Yup-themes can literally be any length at all. Even-numbered symmetrical phrases are the most common in the classical style. But Mozart and friends regularly write 9-, 11-, and 13-bar phrases, etc.
This is a great question. Bar form doesn't get talked about much these days, at least among Anglophone scholars of form in classical music. But it seems to me that there must be some kind of deep, primordial connection between the two somewhere in history. Bar form is certainly the older of the two, and my understanding is that it arose in vocal-music traditions rather than those of instrumental music. (Though sentences may also have roots in vocal patterns of the pre-classical era, despite some theorists' insistence that they are a strictly classical-i.e., post-1770-phenomenon.) I'm no expert on bar form, but to my understanding, the biggest differences might be (1) that the "A" section (the "Stolle") consists of a complete (usually vocal) phrase rather than a shorter (usually instrumental) motivic idea as in the sentence; (2) the B section of a bar form (the "Abgesang") is not normatively the same length as A+A, as it is in the archetypal sentence. (Though it often is, and I could be totally wrong about that...) It's worth noting that the "short-short-long" pattern shared by sentence and bar form is something widely studied in the music of Richard Wagner, where one sometimes has trouble telling the difference between a long sentence and a short bar form-if the distinction even matters.
@@SethMonahan thank you so much! It helped me a lot to clarify things at least to my understanding, I really enjoy your videos and learn a lot from them. Best regards.
Seth... I greatly enjoy your presentations for the ease, conciseness, and clarity of the explanations. I routinely share them with my classes in order to help develop and strengthen their foundation of understanding. Could you please share the software that you use for producing them? It would be greatly appreciated. Best, Dominick
Hi Dominick! Thanks so much for the kind words. My workflow usually involves five apps: (1) Sibelius to set musical examples; (2) Audacity to groom sound files; (3) Adobe Illustrator to manipulate vector graphics exported from Sibelius [this isn't necessary in every video-but it's critical for some]; (4) Keynote to build the slideshow itself; and (5) Camtasia to record the slideshow, my voice [via USB mic]; and my MIDI keyboard. Occasionally I use Adobe Photoshop for grooming pixilated graphics too.
Hi! May I ask another question related to this video? I'm looking at the score of "Vorschneller Schwur" by Brahms (Sieben Lieder Op.95 - 5), and after watching your video, I think I see (if I understood you correctly) that the first part of the song is divided in 3 parallel phrases. The first two end with a dominant chord and the third one with the tonic. Is that "a thing"? to have more than one antecedent phrase, before a consequent one? Thank you.
Hi Flora! What an interesting song-I'd never heard it before. I agree that there are three parallel phrases here, though I also think they all have different endings, harmonically: a half cadence in Dm; an authentic cadence in Am (w/picardy third); and an authentic cadence in Dm. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any comparable structures in other pieces-though they must exist. There's a thing called a "double period," which I decided was too rare to include in the video: they're periods whose antecedent and consequent are both themselves periods, making for a four-phrase structure. But three is curious...I'll have to write back if I come across another. (What's interesting is that the tripartite layout isn't due to the text. Brahms deliberately sets four lines of poetry as three musical phrases!)
@@SethMonahan I think it's an nice song, although I can only listen to it sung by Jessye Norman (I just prefer her interpretation over others I've heard). About your remarks, I'm not sure I understand why, if the song is in Dm and the second sentence ends with an Am chord (A-C# - A), you say it is an authentic cadence... I thought that makes it a V chord and thus a HC. I also hadn't noticed the C# in that chord and had forgotten what a picardy third was! Anyway, I thought the first two sentences end with a HC and only the third one with a PAC, which is why I wondered if you can have two antecedent phrases in a row, followed by a consequent. I really appreciate your taking the time to answer my questions; It is very generous of you!
Hi Flora! To analyze the cadence at the end of the second phrase, one has to consider its immediate tonal context rather than the key of the song as a whole. And that phrase quickly veers away from D minor into the key of A minor. One could observe this on the level of pitch content: notice that all B's and C's are natural, and most G's are sharp. All of those signals undermine the integrity of Dm, which relies heavily on Bb, C#, and G-natural to orient listeners. Harmonic syntax is no less important: the progressions Brahms uses in this phrase are mostly native to A minor rather than D minor. (Only the move from C major to F major might turn up in Dm, as VII-III.)
@@SethMonahan It shouldn't amaze me, but I'm amazed at how much you notice, or rather, how much I didn't notice in this song. I'm referring to Brahms fitting 4 lines of the poem into three musical phrases! It prompted me to look at the second stanza and I see that there he doesn't need to do it, since the text fits. So, I guess he wanted both parts to match in rhythm and duration?
Is it possible to have a "period within a period" structure like this: Phrase A Phrase B Phrase B Phrase A The only way I know to describe it is as a Double period, but that term is usually used for 4 phrase periods where each phrase is a slightly modified version of Phrase A, not for the "period within a period" that I am talking about. I would imagine that the cadence structure would be this: Phrase A, HC Phrase B, HC Phrase B, IAC Phrase A, PAC I'm just asking because I have had that thought cross my mind before of having this phrase structure in my music.
No worries! I've actually had students try to analyze this passage in class but without noticing the opening treble clef. So they start analyzing the chords *as if* the lower staff was all in bass clef. It actually sounds hilariously bad when you play it that way. :)
Best explanation of sentences, period. ;)
Ahhhhhh-I see what you did there! (And many thanks!)
so much digging on youtube to find this gem channel 🙏
How wonderful to have access to knowledge at this high calibre! Thanks for taking time to make this video, which I believe will be beneficial to music enthusiasts all around the globe!
You're very welcome-glad you liked it!
This is amazing, Prof. Monahan. Thanks for all this fine work.
This is mindblowing to me, I cant explain how grateful I am for your videos! thank you Seth the man!!!
Amazing channel and well explained 👋
The pants on fire..... I needed that comic relief 😂
Ha-I forgot about that! On reflection, I think that guy's screaming should really be louder. Oh well....
Amazing!!!
great presentation - precise, clear, direct and very helpful !
Even for amateurs like me it is understandable
( like every video from Seth) and very welcome!
Thanks so much for your work and presentation!
The best explanation for period and sentence!! Thanks from China !!
I've been cruising through your harmony videos, but this is the stuff that I really need to get under my belt. I mostly write a capella choral music, so tend to just let the form such as it is evolve out of the text. I have however set myself the task of making a more symmetrical setting of a poem for one of my choirs, and this has been most instructive.
Fantastic series. Thank you so much for your work putting this together. Great to see such content referencing the masters!
The way you provide extensive examples for everything is so incredibly helpful. Great video.
6:02 is from the finale of Mozart early G minor symphony.
So well presented…and this content is exactly what I was seeking. Thank you!
You're very welcome!
WOW! Great STUFF! I'm learning a lot! ❤ 😊
It's impossible to describe how music form changed my life, as a amateur musician. All i can say it was impossible to me to make an international thematic melody before i learn about it...And it's something NO ONE talk about on channels dedicated to self taught producers. It's baffling. And yes, i learned it from different channel, but still i get new knowledge here :)
Thank you!
(5:06) That's the 4th movement of the Mozart symphony not the 1st. This is a great series of videos (Lesson10 onward is really fascinating stuff!), I just thought I had to point that out to feel smart.
Great job sir! Thank you for your hard work!
Just wanted to let you know, though, that the musical excerpt provided on 5:15 of Mozart’s Symphony No. 25 is not movement I (as the video claims) but rather, movement IV.
Hi Kevin. Ugh-you're totally right. This was back in the days when I didn't read from a script, and somehow I let the typo in the caption above the score confuse me. It wouldn't bother me so much if the opening of Sym. 25 weren't so famous. What an embarrassing gaffe!
Don’t you worry about it man! It’s a small detail compared to the enormous help that this video offered me yesterday night. Keep up the good work!
What kind of language/form did Bach use? Since you didnt use any examples by him
Thanks for your videos!
In his book, William Caplin mentions that the antecedent or consequent of a period may be felt like a "mini-sentence".
Along the same idea, would it be wrong to say that in your 8:30 Mozart 's example, the presentation phrase of that huge sentence sounds like a contrasting period?
Great question! Broadly speaking, the answer is "yes." A number of scholars, including some of Caplin's most successful students, have talked about this phenomenon in the music of the 1820s and later-i.e., the gigantic sentence whose presentation sounds like a period. I the case of Mozart's Gm symphony, I'd say the presentation sounds more like a parallel period than a contrasting one. But the broader point holds!
Nice video, nice examples
Such a great series!
Hello Mr. Seth,
Thanks for your excellent explanation that clears many sophisticated subjects for us.
1) At 6:35 in this video, the second bar is named the dominant seven (V7) while the chord has only three notes G, B, and D. Isn't it a dominant triad, not a dominant seven?
2) At 8:25 in this video, the last bar as PAC should include a dominant and then a tonic chord. But the note of the first part is G and B as the dominant part on G major, and a single G note in the 2nd part as the tonic chord.
As I know, a dominant chord in G major is D, F, and A (and other similar combinations), but not G, and B. Would you mind explaining this concept?
3) At 11:50 in this video, the last bar as PAC should include a dominant and then a tonic chord. But it has only one single note F, is it PAC, that includes only a tonic note?
Great questions! Here are some answers: (1) The V7 at 6:35 is a typo. Should be V. (2) At 8:25, I'm not sure what you mean: the last beat of m. 9 has a full V7 chord (DF#AC) resolving on the downbeat of m. 10 to G/B (an incomplete tonic "triad," which is very common). (3) At 11:50, we see a very common situation, which is the omission of complete chords at a PAC, in favor of bare octaves on the dominant and tonic notes. (I explain this roughly 8 minutes into Lesson 11, if you're curious to see other examples.)
@@SethMonahan Thanks Sir, for the clarification and magnificent answers.
2) Where is the full V7 chord (DF#AC) in the PAC bar?
Thanks for the great content! I'm curious how we can use this information to compose classical music eventually. The theory topics seem really fragmented, and I'm struggling to see how they could be turned into something useful. It's also tough because I can't hear these complex parts and notes in my head. Do you think we need to train our ears more before moving forward? And could you please suggest some supplementary materials for extra practice on these concepts?
Great, important questions, and hard ones to answer quickly! It may help to know that I'm making this video series as the "textbook" for conservatory classes I teach in person, so you're only seeing one aspect of the pedagogy. The theoretical stuff is foundational, of course. But the rubber meets the road in the ear training, which can't be rushed. I have my students singing and playing the piano as much as possible, to give a sonic reality to the stylistic principles. If you're hoping to compose in the classical style one day, I'd recommend a three-pronged approach. First, listen and internalize as much music as possible. Develop an intuitive sense for what's conventional and what's unusual. Second, learn how the music works on a technical level. Learn the names for things. Know what happens and what doesn't, how harmony and phrasing are organized locally and over the long haul. Third, roll up your sleeves and do as much analysis as possible. And by "analysis," I absolutely do NOT mean "chord labeling." I mean listening with and without scores and learning to recognize the basic patterns and grammar. (An experienced analyst of this music doesn't usually need to go chord-by-chord; they can follow the bass line and infer the harmony they hear above it.)
In terms of additional resources: alas, if I thought there were really good materials out there, I wouldn't be making my own! I'm self-taught, and a lot of my teaching aims to help students experience the same little, incremental moments of discovery and heightened awareness that got me where I am today. But it takes time...a lot of it! It's a labor of love, to be sure.
@@SethMonahan Thank you for taking the time to respond. It gave me some ideas.
Really thanks so much for your video. I just finished my music theory class today and the knowledge which I do not understand so clearly in the class. Your video is Useful and detailed!!!!
Great video, with clear explanations of the subject matter.
I was expecting the "but this is not actually what Mozart wrote, I wrote that" bomb haha
These videos are fantastic!
Thanks so much!
That's really great, sorry I will repeat myself but I learnt those by myself, using old french books by Vincent d'Indy, but I never had the chance to actually know if I understood it clearly, and no one was able to respond to questions I might have..plus I'm not a good piano player at all ; this was until I found your channel :p
so thank you again for all your incredible work !! Jazz ressources are commonly found on the internet but not classical ;
thank you professor for posting those valuable videos!
Maestro: Thank you for the privilege of your time and genius. It is clear, transparent and to the point; unobstructed by legalism that only confuse. Please do not stop and again thank you. Do you have any "instructional sheets" that can aid in the studies? Again please accept my sincerely gratitude and please do not cease to do what you do for us "amateurs." With respect and gratitude, R
You're much too kind! I'm delighted that you like the channel, though. Unfortunately, most of the supporting materials I make for the videos are activities I do in class with my students. So they're not usually in a format to be shared (e.g., pdfs or other print materials). That said, I did make a multimedia flashcard set this year to help my students hear sentences and periods by ear. It lives in the "Brainscape" app, and if you'd like to try it out, you can use this link to enroll in the "class." www.brainscape.com/p/2RYTH-LH-CFXQ9
Hi! May I ask another question, please?
4) At 14:30, how and where from the note sheet has the composer modulated from C minor to G minor or other keys?
Do you have any textbook recommendations for learning more about musical form/structure?
Sure: Bill Caplin's "Analyzing Classical Form" and Jim Hepokoski's "Sonata Theory Handbook" are relatively recent publications that are (1) written by leading people in the field and (2) designed for folks who aren't career academics. Neither is perfect, and the two famously disagree on many things. (They used to debate each other publicly for sport, basically.) But each is a solid starting point if you're willing to read and listen a lot.
@@SethMonahan Many thanks!
This is pedagogy of a high order. Thank you for all your work. I like especially you clear, illustrative graphics. I was raised on the Laitz book on harmonic theory, which also goes through sentences and periods. One question I have always had: in what sense is a sentence a “sentence” and a period a “period”? You could make a good case that the “period”, with its antecedent and consequent, is a sentence, as generally understood. Put otherwise, the names are odd. You thoughts?
Like so many things in music theory, these terms are sort of accidental bedfellows, not the product of any kind of logical, systematic process. I'm pretty sure that "period" is the older of the two names in English; it probably comes from the idea that something "periodic" happens repeatedly-thus the application to a model that pairs one phase with another. (Note, however, that there is *no* consensus over the past century re: the necessary/sufficient conditions to have a "period." Some people believe that without specifically parallel phases, you don't have a period, etc.)
"Sentence" is a more recent acquisition in English. If I recall correctly, the form was identified by Schoenberg as a "Satz"-a German word with roughly six billion meanings, one of them being "sentence." It was then popularized by his student Erwin Ratz. But it wasn't really a mainstream English term (i.e., "sentence") until the end of the 20th century, though.
TLDR: my impression is that there's no rhyme or reason behind the names sentence or period, and the fact that they both refer to grammatical/lexical structures in the English language is just a coincidence.
Thx for taking the time to clarify.
Definitely one of those videos I’ll have to come back to
Thank you. More forms and structures please.
I stumbled across your channel after googling "lament bass harmonisation" and I'm incredibly glad I did. These are videos of remarkable quality; thanks so much for making them. I'm working my way through them all. I realise that you specialize in classical period theory; but I would love a video comparing and contrasting baroque and classical treatments of harmony and phrase structure; a big topic, but it would be great. Anyway, once again, thanks for such brilliant material!
awesome video! Very helpful to me in my Theory II class
At 6:35, the chord in the second bar is written as V7, but we don’t see the seventh in this bar. Is it a typo or is it because the F notes in the surrounding bars can affect our judgement of the chord in this bar as well?
Good catch, Chuan! Unfortunately, that’s just a typo. I work quickly and the price I pay is little errors like this now and then.
Very good!
Thank you very much!
Thank you so much for your videos, they are so helpful!
Glad you like them, Noah!
Great video! Thanks for making it!
Thanks, David-glad you enjoyed it!
Hi Seth and thank you for the amazing tutorial video . A period can not go to another degree except V to tonic ? Can’t go for example from IV to I or from II to tonic ? Nocturne op.9 no.2 by Chopin ends up with a PAC two times and I doubt if I can consider those first 8 measure as a sentence , I think is a period but based on your explanation the first four measure should be a half cadence or imperfect cadence ! Then why the nocturne op.9 no.2 is opposite!? ( two perfect authentic cadence in a row )
Please give me your advice I really want the answer 💗
Hi Dante! One does sometimes come across periods with unusual cadence schemes in the classical era. Just this morning, I found a Haydn period where the first phrase ended with an IAC and the second with a HC. I also recall hearing periods where both phrases ended in half cadences-which feels fairly strange to me. (Are they "really" periods at all!?!?) However, in Chopin op. 9/2, I don't think the opening 8 bars are best understood as antecedent + consequent. It's better, I think, to understand that movement as a rounded binary form with written-out repeats. So instead of two sections-A and BA'-surrounded by repeats, Chopin simply writes them out in full, but with lots of new embellishment in the melody: AABA'BA'. (A is mm. 1-4, repeated in 5-8. The first B section is mm. 9-12 and the first A' is 13-16. These then repeat immediately, with variation.) In this understanding of the form, mm. 1-4 and 5-8 are "supposed to be" the same music rather than complementary halves of a parallel period. The fact that Chopin varies the theme on the second sounding is just a bonus!
17:38
sounds like septet for a dead princess
Hi can themes be longer than 8 bars, I have an example where if it cuts to 8 bars there would be no cadence compared to 10 bars
Yup-themes can literally be any length at all. Even-numbered symmetrical phrases are the most common in the classical style. But Mozart and friends regularly write 9-, 11-, and 13-bar phrases, etc.
@@SethMonahan thanks ur videos are very helpful 👌🏼👌🏼
WOW I JUST LERANT EVERYTHING I NEEDED TO KNOW
Hi, thanks a lot for sharing your knowledge, I have a question I hope you could answer me, what are the differences between sentences and BAR form?
This is a great question. Bar form doesn't get talked about much these days, at least among Anglophone scholars of form in classical music. But it seems to me that there must be some kind of deep, primordial connection between the two somewhere in history. Bar form is certainly the older of the two, and my understanding is that it arose in vocal-music traditions rather than those of instrumental music. (Though sentences may also have roots in vocal patterns of the pre-classical era, despite some theorists' insistence that they are a strictly classical-i.e., post-1770-phenomenon.) I'm no expert on bar form, but to my understanding, the biggest differences might be (1) that the "A" section (the "Stolle") consists of a complete (usually vocal) phrase rather than a shorter (usually instrumental) motivic idea as in the sentence; (2) the B section of a bar form (the "Abgesang") is not normatively the same length as A+A, as it is in the archetypal sentence. (Though it often is, and I could be totally wrong about that...)
It's worth noting that the "short-short-long" pattern shared by sentence and bar form is something widely studied in the music of Richard Wagner, where one sometimes has trouble telling the difference between a long sentence and a short bar form-if the distinction even matters.
@@SethMonahan thank you so much! It helped me a lot to clarify things at least to my understanding, I really enjoy your videos and learn a lot from them. Best regards.
Seth... I greatly enjoy your presentations for the ease, conciseness, and clarity of the explanations. I routinely share them with my classes in order to help develop and strengthen their foundation of understanding. Could you please share the software that you use for producing them? It would be greatly appreciated. Best, Dominick
Hi Dominick! Thanks so much for the kind words. My workflow usually involves five apps: (1) Sibelius to set musical examples; (2) Audacity to groom sound files; (3) Adobe Illustrator to manipulate vector graphics exported from Sibelius [this isn't necessary in every video-but it's critical for some]; (4) Keynote to build the slideshow itself; and (5) Camtasia to record the slideshow, my voice [via USB mic]; and my MIDI keyboard. Occasionally I use Adobe Photoshop for grooming pixilated graphics too.
@@SethMonahan Thank you for the response. I am certainly looking forward to more from you. : )
Seth Monahan. So.much.work. Thank you so much. I've been playing for 50 years, but I'm learning from every single video!
You. Da. Man.
Hi! May I ask another question related to this video? I'm looking at the score of "Vorschneller Schwur" by Brahms (Sieben Lieder Op.95 - 5), and after watching your video, I think I see (if I understood you correctly) that the first part of the song is divided in 3 parallel phrases. The first two end with a dominant chord and the third one with the tonic. Is that "a thing"? to have more than one antecedent phrase, before a consequent one? Thank you.
Hi Flora! What an interesting song-I'd never heard it before. I agree that there are three parallel phrases here, though I also think they all have different endings, harmonically: a half cadence in Dm; an authentic cadence in Am (w/picardy third); and an authentic cadence in Dm. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any comparable structures in other pieces-though they must exist. There's a thing called a "double period," which I decided was too rare to include in the video: they're periods whose antecedent and consequent are both themselves periods, making for a four-phrase structure. But three is curious...I'll have to write back if I come across another.
(What's interesting is that the tripartite layout isn't due to the text. Brahms deliberately sets four lines of poetry as three musical phrases!)
@@SethMonahan I think it's an nice song, although I can only listen to it sung by Jessye Norman (I just prefer her interpretation over others I've heard). About your remarks, I'm not sure I understand why, if the song is in Dm and the second sentence ends with an Am chord (A-C# - A), you say it is an authentic cadence... I thought that makes it a V chord and thus a HC. I also hadn't noticed the C# in that chord and had forgotten what a picardy third was!
Anyway, I thought the first two sentences end with a HC and only the third one with a PAC, which is why I wondered if you can have two antecedent phrases in a row, followed by a consequent.
I really appreciate your taking the time to answer my questions; It is very generous of you!
Hi Flora! To analyze the cadence at the end of the second phrase, one has to consider its immediate tonal context rather than the key of the song as a whole. And that phrase quickly veers away from D minor into the key of A minor. One could observe this on the level of pitch content: notice that all B's and C's are natural, and most G's are sharp. All of those signals undermine the integrity of Dm, which relies heavily on Bb, C#, and G-natural to orient listeners. Harmonic syntax is no less important: the progressions Brahms uses in this phrase are mostly native to A minor rather than D minor. (Only the move from C major to F major might turn up in Dm, as VII-III.)
@@SethMonahan Oh, wow. I'm going to look at that closely. Thank you and Happy Thanksgiving!
@@SethMonahan It shouldn't amaze me, but I'm amazed at how much you notice, or rather, how much I didn't notice in this song. I'm referring to Brahms fitting 4 lines of the poem into three musical phrases! It prompted me to look at the second stanza and I see that there he doesn't need to do it, since the text fits. So, I guess he wanted both parts to match in rhythm and duration?
Thank you very much!
Thank you!!
You're very welcome!
Is it possible to have a "period within a period" structure like this:
Phrase A
Phrase B
Phrase B
Phrase A
The only way I know to describe it is as a Double period, but that term is usually used for 4 phrase periods where each phrase is a slightly modified version of Phrase A, not for the "period within a period" that I am talking about. I would imagine that the cadence structure would be this:
Phrase A, HC
Phrase B, HC
Phrase B, IAC
Phrase A, PAC
I'm just asking because I have had that thought cross my mind before of having this phrase structure in my music.
maybe it is considered an double period insetead of an period inside a period
I think it is possible but not common in the classical style, maybe a plagual cadance is more suited at these ends.
Sir ..is it possible you teach me online..I want to learn composition ..iam from India ..thankyou sir
Good video, but the bass clef in Beethoven's 5th was switched to G clef.
Thanks, Igor. Not sure what you mean, though. Nothing was "switched" to anything; all the clefs in that reduction are correct.
My bad, didn't notice the change in the 9th bar xD Good job :)
No worries! I've actually had students try to analyze this passage in class but without noticing the opening treble clef. So they start analyzing the chords *as if* the lower staff was all in bass clef. It actually sounds hilariously bad when you play it that way. :)
@@SethMonahan my mistake was missing the change to the bass treble xD
🤯
My university should really hire you to be the instructor instead... We paid so much but learn nothing, and I basically learn everything from here...