Lasse Thoresen

(with the assistance of Andreas Hedman and Olav Anton Thommessen)

FORM-BUILDING TRANSFORMATIONS
An Approach to the Aural Analysis of Emergent Musical Forms

3.1. On the Theoretical Background of Aural Sonology

The present approach to analysis, termed Aural Sonology, results from an attempt to
analyze music as represented on a phonogram, rather than on a score. This approach is
particularly useful for dealing with music for which no score is available (e.g.
electroacoustic music) or music in which there is no simple one-to-one correspondence
between score and the aural phenomenon (which is often the case with late romantic and
impressionist music as well as contemporary music), although music in which such a
correspondence is evident (e.g. classical Western music) is by no means excluded, as
long as the piece is represented on a phonogram. Aural Sonology shifts the focus of
musical analysis from applying analytical concepts to what the analyst sees in a score,
towards what she hears. The musical object is not entirely an objective fact but is partly
constituted by the listeners intentions. Accordingly, in order to achieve a systematic
analytical approach with a degree of intersubjective consensus, the analysis must be
backed up by a theory of listening intentions, and these must not only be identified but
practiced by the analyst: she must learn to observe, discern and select a specific
listening intention of her own mind, as well as be able to set and maintain a consistent
focus on selected strands of the multidimensional reality of music as heard.[1]

The objective of this article is to present one particular method of analysis developed
within the framework. However, since Aural Sonology differs from most other
scholarly approaches to analysis, it will be useful for the reader to have a condensed
introduction to some of the theoretical and aesthetic assumptions on which it rests.

3.1.1. Background and Aesthetic Orientation

The Aural Sonology Project began in the 1970s. The two main influences were
Sonology as taught at the Institute of Sonology, Utrecht Netherlands (today moved to
the Royal Conservatory at the Hague), and the phenomenologically oriented,
spectromorphological point of view articulated by Pierre Schaeffers Trait des objets
musicaux, and further expanded at INA/GRM, Paris, France. The ideas gathered were
subsequently refined at the Norwegian Academy of Music in Oslo, through a
collaboration between Professor Olav Anton Thommessen and the present author, both
of us professors of musical composition. The development of the methods of analysis
took place within the context of a circle comprising performers and composers, which
accounts for the general orientation towards an applied branch of music theory designed
to enhance artistic sensibilities and cognition. Aural Sonology has been regularly taught
at the Academy since the beginning of the 1980s, and has continued to evolve
interactively in the dialogue between students and teachers It has been the aim of the
project to develop a conceptual structure of analysis and theory that is not uniquely
reserved for a particular compositional style or expression, but addresses music
appreciation in Western art music on a general basis.
Aural Sonology has consistently been concerned with aural consciousness during a
period of music history in which creative musical thinking has largely been
concentrated on the development of novel compositional techniques and technology.
The serial composition technique depended on the written medium as its extratemporal
support; algorithmic approaches to music tended to substitute the sonic representation of
music with a model.[2] The motivation for launching the Aural Sonology Project was a
strong impression that the aural aspect of contemporary music was being neglected by
contemporary composers to the detriment of its ability to communicate with a non-
specialized audience. The Aural Sonology Project therefore seeks to enhance the
listeners ability to encounter and evaluate the sonic results of any technical procedure,
by an explication and conceptualization of its perceived, aural syntax. Moreover, Aural
Sonology intends to benefit from the study of the aural syntaxes and principles of form
in music that have already proven to make sense in a greater community of listeners.
This will be done through an effort to formulate observations in an abstract way such as
to facilitate its eventual transfer to new sonic materials. Therefore, Aural Sonology
seeks to conceptualize and represent graphically that which makes syntactical sense in
music as heard. That music even new music - ought to make sense to the average
listener, not only to the composer or the intellectual elite, was a position occasionally
attacked by the most fervent adherents of the avant-garde, for whom alienation,
negation and fragmentation were the highest ideals for contemporary music.

The methodological approach chosen combines a phenomenological perspective with a

pragmatic use of selected structuralist techniques. Phenomenology provides the global
outlook, with its emphasis on the life world (hence music as heard), its explication of
intentionalities, and its emphasis on describing and reflecting on an experienced object,
rather than on its explanation.[3] Although a number of books and essays have been
written on the subject of musical phenomenology, as well as on music from a
phenomenological perspective, all seem to overlook the need to develop a terminology
suitable for describing the phenomenon of music in experiential terms, falling back
either on philosophical jargon, everyday language, or a terminology of traditional
musicological or acoustics, employing terms that are not coined within a consistent
phenomenological point of view. Aural Sonology has taken the step to construct a new
and consistent terminology based on aural experience and correlated through specified
structural relationships. While structuralist techniques provide helpful schemata for
organizing a conceptual world, structuralism as such lacks the concept of a conscious,
perceiving subject, and has a tendency to overlook the particular in favour of a
postulated universality. The phenomenological perspective counterbalances this
deficiency of structuralism. All the structural concepts developed are condensed into a
set of graphic symbols, so that the concepts can be used in practical analysis.

3.1.2. Listening Intentions, Listening Behaviours

Music as heard is a phenomenon of enormous richness and ambiguity. People make

sense of music in a number of very different ways, which tends to make a meaningful
discussion about music problematic. Even when listening to the same piece of music,
interpreted by the same musicians, the listening experience itself, and its interpretation
in words, varies greatly. The musical experience consists of a synthesis of signs and
signals transmitted as sound, and of the listening subjects own perceptions and
conceptions of the music, i.e. his constitution of the musical object. Different listening
intentions constitute different musical objects.
Based on analysis of interviews with listeners, Francois Delalande, researcher at
INA/GRM, has come up with suggestions for a number of listener behaviours, each of
which is representative of different musical listening intentions that constitute widely
different musical objects and interpretations. The present project can be seen as a
specialized development of one of these listener behaviours, that which has been termed
taxonomic listening. Francois Delalande (1998, pp. 26-27) defines this listening
behaviour in the following way:

Taxonomic listening is manifest through the listeners tendency:

To distinguish sufficiently large morphological units such as sections or chains

and to make a mental list of them;
To qualify these, but just enough to distinguish them from each other,
To notice how these units are arranged in relation to one another,
To try and memorize all this data.

This is a listening behaviour that leads to the most neutral perceptual image possible in
the sense that the subjects who practice it aim: (1) to give a complete picture with little
detail, a map on a large enough scale without distorting the design; (2) to parenthesize
subjective characteristics which might affect the true image of the object For these
subjects it is a canvas on which one will subsequently be able to plot more personal
observations. It is conceived as a practical reference ... It is possible that these ideas of
pictures, maps and score graphic representations on paper correspond to what
happens in listening. Paper as a medium is associated with a double function: (1) a
memory aid; (2) an analytical tool for laying out the relative nature of units. (Delalande,
1998, pp. 26-27).

Expanding upon Francois Delalandes observation, it could be said that such a listening
attitude would favour the observation of forms, e.g. the study of how identifiable
smaller parts would integrate into greater wholes. In Aural Sonology we develop this
listening intention in a systematic fashion. The musical phenomenon, and the aural
investigation of it are generally divided into three levels:

Level 1: sound objects i.e. single sound objects, analyzed in spectromorphologic

terms.
Level 2: elementary gestalts i.e. combinations of sound objects into small
patterns.
Level 3: form gestalts i.e. patterns of elementary gestalts.

Traditionally, music theory and analysis has taken for granted the nature of the sound
objects being dealt with. However, it is clear that the pitched, stable sounds on which
traditional music theory are built is a special case in the larger world of sounds. The
main focus of traditional theory has been a discussion of how pitched sound objects can
be combined in scales, and chords and into larger compounds such as harmony
progressions, etc., all of which are clearly level 2 phenomena. Studies of contemporary
music are also largely concentrated on this level.
The focus of the Aural Sonology Project is on levels 1 and 3, with a clear emphasis on
level 3. Thus the analysis of musical forms as heard, level 3, is the focus of the present
article. This means that e.g. the harmonic structure of a piece will not be analyzed on its
own terms, and will only be significant to the extent its effect is deemed relevant for the
conception of an abstract formal model on level 3.

3.1.3. The Semiologic Tripartition

To analyze means to reflect, and to reflect is a complex process that both articulates the
perception of music into more details, and seeks to integrate the details into a
comprehension of the greater whole. Since the analytic process of reflection evolves
over time, it presumes that the object of reflection remains static. Thus the object must
be contained in an extra-temporal, stable, material medium permitting identical
repetition of the object researched. Moreover, the object under study should be
represented in such a way that it can be shared with others. For centuries, musical
notation has provided such a representation of the musical work in the Western context,
and has been a prerequisite for reflection and analysis. Therefore it has been accorded
the status of a kind of neutral, objective reality to which the community of researchers
could return in order to check one anothers conclusions.

The present approach to analysis consistently replaces the score with the phonogram as
the extra-temporal, material support of analytical reflection. The advent of recording
technology and loudspeakers has opened new horizons for analyzing music as heard.
The only reason why this approach does not seem to be much exploited in music theory,
analysis, and in musicology in general, seems to be a general scepticism towards the ear
as a sufficiently objective instrument of observation. Aural Sonology insists that
consensus with regard to listening intentions will solve this predicament and open a new
field of research, complementary to other, established disciplines. This is made possible
thanks to the heritage of Pierre Schaeffer, and his successors at GRM such as Guy
Reibel, Michel Chion, Francois Bayle, and Francois Delalande, who have carried out
pioneering efforts in sorting out the dimensions of the listening consciousness.

The semiologic tripartition may serve as an initial help in sorting out listening intentions
by correlating these to three aspects of the musical object.[4] The three domains are the
poetic domain (related to the process of creating a piece of music, thus dealing with the
composers techniques, strategies and expressive intentions, and also the performers
interpretative intentions), the esthesic domain (dealing with the listeners reception of
the music) and a neutral domain (the uninterpreted, observable aspect of music).

Although initially useful, the semiologic tripartition, as proposed by Molino and

Nattiez, is problematic in a few respects. The third neutral domain appears by and large
to be a musicological construct since it is not clearly related to music as a system of
signs.[5] In a life world perspective, it is above all music as heard (the esthesic domain)
that is associated with meaning formation. The creative aspect of music (the poetic
domain) is also relevant to meaning formation, first of all the intentions of composers
and performers and their personal and cultural context, and the processes and techniques
of composing and performing. It is therefore reasonable to propose a reorganization of
the semiotic tripartition, in which the neutral domain is seen as the observable aspects
of the esthesic and the poetic domains, respectively, and its status as an independent
domain of research is reduced considerably.
The restructuring of the semiologic tripartition proposed above, suggests there is a
manifest and a hidden side to the esthesic and the poetic domains, respectively.
The manifest side comprises the material traces of the work, while the hidden comprises
the expressive aspect, that which is concerned with meaning or musical sense. The
manifest side always has a potential for being neutral, in the sense that it is
observable, and since it is observable it can be shared with others and form the basis for
shared understanding. Admittedly, isolating the neutral sphere of music is somehow
artificial, since many listeners behaviours do not favour giving focused attention to the
material aspect of the sound experience, such as the sound itself. When diverting from
the listener behaviour that is the preferred when listening to a particular kind of music,
one risks missing features that are pertinent to the formations of musical meaning
understood as feelings, general ideas, world views etc. This can only be compensated
for by the analysts consciousness of the artificiality of isolating one aspect of music as
heard, and by his mastery of other, complementary listeners intentions. In other words:
the ability to shift between different listener attitudes becomes a prerequisite for relating
to music in a way that avoids the disadvantages of reductionism.

The analytical focus of Aural Sonology, then, is the neutral side of the esthesic domain,
i.e. the material, observable aspects of the aural experience. The neutral side of the
esthesic domain must be constituted by an act of the listener through his choosing the
requisite listening intention. The two listener intentions preferred for our analytical
purposes are the reductive listening intention (for level 1 this is, briefly, the intention to
hear sound as sound, and will not be further dealt with in this article) and the taxonomic
listening (levels 1 and 2).[6]

A study of the neutral domain (as defined above) will in fact be a study of the signifiant
of the musical sign. In a semiotic perspective, such a study may only be relevant for
approaching its signifi (interpreting its meaning) to the extent that the musical signs
used are motivated signs (dealing with iconic or indexical links between expression and
content) rather than arbitrary ones (defined purely by convention). The relative lack of
musical vocabularies suggests that music is mostly a system of motivated signs.[7] Thus
studies of the neutral aspects of music are potentially relevant also for approaching
musical meaning the signifi.

The analyses produced by the methods introduced by Aural Sonology are definitely not
compositional techniques. Nevertheless they may be of great value to composers and
performers, since listening and reflecting on the aural reality of music in most cases
contributes positively to the quality of music making and performing. Thus while Aural
Sonology analyses are focused on the neutral side of the esthesic domain, the exercise
of conducting such analyses is a useful one for giving the composer a number of more
specific ideas about the shaping of his compositions, as it develops his ability to
conceive of what he eventually would like to hear when the piece is being performed;
such an exercise also encourages performers to shape their interpretations guided by a
greater awareness of how musical gestalts evolve in time and affect the listener.

3.1.4. Gestalts and Structures

Music exists in our life world long before we learn to discuss language and grammars
conceptually. We are able sing a melody long before we can define what pitch is
verbally; music makes sense to us as listeners and performers long before we can
describe musical form. Music is mostly learnt like a mother tongue; we learn to speak it
before we learn its grammar. A native speaker relies on his ear to determine whether a
certain combination of words is acceptable and correct. Similarly, musical thought
understands in terms of aural gestalts, whose wellformedness is judged in an analogous
fashion, relying on the ear. Music theory and analytical methods generally try to
comprehend music in a conceptual way, describing the intrinsic coherence of the
gestalts through structural terms, which is basically what grammars do in relation to
spoken language. Grammars do not define a language; they describe a language that is
already given in the life world. Similarly, the comprehension of musical structure,
which is a central concern to the Aural Sonology Project, will always be a subset of
what can be understood by a listener subjected to the temporal flow of musical gestalts.

Aural Sonology takes as its starting point the experience of ordered, sonorous gestalts
in music as heard. The point of departure of the analyst is, accordingly, an emergent
phenomenon; from here, she proceeds in the direction of defining her experience by
assigning to her experience a description in terms of structure. The initial perspective is
holistic: the analyst starts with a concrete phenomenon as a given whole, meeting it with
an attentive and receptive consciousness. The holistic orientation in combination with
elements of applied phenomenology and structuralism, make the present project
different from a number of more traditional approaches to analysis; e.g. it differs from
the methodological position of operational structuralism that tries to explain
phenomena through the disclosure of generative relationships within the object
researched.[8]

Aural Sonology is characterized by an effort to develop means for the description of the
perceived musical order, and, to the extent possible, correlate the order or gestalt
heard with a theoretical structure (which is an ideal object in phenomenological terms).
It must be underlined again that the kind of structure found by our methods of analysis
is not one that is intrinsic to the construction of the object studied, as it does not
necessarily explain its genesis. Rather, it is a concrete instance of experienced order of
an object; and this experience is founded both in objective musical reality and at the
same time in certain constitutive intentions on the part of the listener. The equivalent of
musical structure in the esthesic domain is actually the experience of order, pattern and
regularity. Thus the object analyzed presupposes an active constitution on the part of
the listener. Combining this with the vehicle of a defined method of analysis, it may be
possible to make pertinent statements about the experience of music that can be
communicated to others who share the same conceptual orientation and master the
requisite listening intention. Of course, what the analyst finds in this way is not
necessarily an intrinsic or essential part of the musics purported meaning, which, in its
original traditional context, might presuppose another constitutive intention.
Accordingly, using the methods of Aural Sonology, one cannot without further
qualifications make definite judgments about the total aspect of meaning and
signification of the work analyzed. This will have to be dealt with by methods
complementary to ours, i.e. the hermeneutical methods often used by traditional
musicology and semiology. However, every scientific methodology constitutes its own
object of research, and in the final analysis, there is no definite and conclusive truth that
can be stated about a work of art. Only by approaching music from many sides, i.e.
through the use of complementary methods, can one see to achieve a more complete
understanding.[9]

Aural Sonology as a method can thus be seen as an effort to correlate the experience of
musical gestalts with a set of structured concepts. The nature and number of these
concepts are largely inconstant, and what we can propose probably only represents a
beginning that serves to lay down certain basic features of musical perception and
cognition as related to form.

3.1.5. Isotopy and Selective Listening

The structural models devised in Aural Sonology will all have to be related to a
consistent selection of features in the perceived music. Music as heard is a concretum,
and is therefore a composite of several attributes, containing an almost infinite amount
of information, given the number of listener intentions by which it can be heard. In our
analytical context, the analyst will have to select and focus consistently on one strand of
aural order; one that seems to be of importance to the organization of the music as a
whole. Such a consistent focus on organizing features within the musical context could
be termed an isotopy with a term adopted from structural semantics.[10]

An isotopy in our context is a consistent strand of aural gestalts perceived to contain

features essential for the organization of long stretches of the musical discourse. An
isotopy may be said to be the underlying problem space of a piece of music, thus the
overarching aspect of complementary opposites. Organization is not here seen as being
primarily a compositional strategy (which is a fact belonging to the poetic domain); it
is what the listener perceives as coordinating or creating coherence in the musical
discourse, by means of recurrent patterns and related contrasts. For each particular
musical isotopy there is a corresponding particular selective listening intention.

The Aural Sonology Project has thus far focused mainly on level 3 in creating
methodical approaches to isotopic structures. The general isotopies relevant to form
building that we at present have managed to develop are:[11]

Time-fields (the temporal segmentation of the musical discourse)

Layers (the synchronous segmentation of the musical discourse)
Dynamic form (time directions and energetic shape)
Thematic form (recurrence, variation, and contrast)
Formal transformations (looser and firmer gestalts, transformations between
them).
The present article will concentrate on Formal transformations, while touching on
thematic form (form-building processes) as well. In addition to such general formal
isotopies, there are other types as well:

Actual, thematized isotopies: Each piece may have its individual musical
isotopy, i.e. recurrent patterns and related opposites that take place within the
same isotopy, and/or interrelated passages between different isotopies.
Condensed, essential isotopies: Recurrent features may be given a condensed
representation in which the isotopic fields are reduced to essential formulae.
Such an essential isotopy can combine several strands of isotopical description,
and define a musical deep structure.
Condensed isotopies can be seen as contextual meanings, i.e. as the observable
side of an iconic sign with a signifi in the extra-musical domain.

3.2. Musical Form

In his concise book on traditional forms in Western art music, Arnold Schoenberg
(1977, p. 20) makes a number of interesting observations concerning the nature of
musical forms in general, and their importance for the reception of the music: Form
means that the piece is organized, and organization means that the music consists of
elements functioning like those of a living organism. Like the elements of an organism,
the constituent parts of music must be differentiated according to their importance and
function, but the differentiation must never endanger the underlying unity of the
composition. Form in this sense ensures intelligibility, logic and coherence; it is what
makes the music comprehensible. Concern about form is a means of surmounting
limited powers of human understanding; as a person is unable to keep in mind very long
time stretches, the musical discourse must be subdivided into manageable segments.
However, these shorter segments must again be joined by relation to the others in such a
way that one segment presupposes the other and vice versa. This is what one could call
formal functions, in a sense similar to that we have with harmonic functions. Variety
can endanger comprehensibility and logic, and this can be avoided by subjecting the
musical elements to appropriate constraints. Delimitation, subdivision and simple
repetition are useful in counteracting the tendency toward disproportionate variety. In
fact, Schoenberg states that musical comprehension is impossible without repetition.
But repetition can easily cause monotony and boredom on the part of the listener. This
must be counteracted by variation of the repeated elements. In a true work of music that
obeys the classical laws of internal unity, even musical contrasts should be related.

The ideal of organic form as discussed by Schoenberg is also essential to our approach.
When it comes to form, we are concerned with subdivisions in the sense of how the
musical object can be articulated through phrases and sections, as well as through
simultaneous layers. Proceeding from here, we are also concerned with the functions
these subdivisions have in relation to one another. Aural Sonology discusses form as an
emergent phenomenon, i.e. it takes account of the phenomenon as such, without giving
an account of why or how the form shows up the way it does. This means that whether
the form is based on harmonic fields, thematic recurrence, tensions and relaxations, or
contrasting textures, the form is accounted for in an abstract sense. Our study of form is
confined to level 3, and does not offer insight into what happens on level 1 or level 2
(referring to the levels we defined in chapter 1.2). This level of abstractness will
enhance the potential of our method to cross over stylistic borders, while it renounces
the precision and specificity of an analysis that shows how the forms are founded in
concrete musical realities.

Approaching musical forms as emergent forms is fundamentally different from

approaching musical forms as normative conventions. The difference lies more in the
attitude than the facts; when looking for emergent forms the music itself has to be
allowed to present its own form, its own rationality to the listeners ear, and this
presupposes a listener who ideally should be willing to bracket her preconceptions of
form during the first hearings of a piece of music, and only afterwards apply his already
acquired assumptions of form with sensitivity and honesty in order to avoid forcing the
music into a wrong or inadequate mould. The aesthetic implication of this is a
conception of musical form that would regard good form more in terms of its emergent
wholeness and rationality, rather than as compliance to formal conventions and codes.
The concept of emergent forms is closely linked to the idea that musical comprehension
can never entirely match musical understanding, which means paraphrasing Pascal -
that the ear can have reasons that the reasoning mind has not yet grasped.

Aural Sonology has developed consistent approaches to three aspects of musical form:
form-building functions (dynamic forms),[12] form-building processes (forms based on
recurrence and contrast), and form-building transformations (forms contrasting loose
and firm gestalts).[13] The remainder of our presentation will focus on the latter, the
form-building transformations, and in no way aspires to deal exhaustively with musical
form in general.

3.2.1. Typology of Form-Building Elements

The perception of musical form arises from the perceived interrelationships between
certain constituent elements. The elements constitutive of form will be called form-
building elements (or simple form elements). These are often found in the
melodic/rhythmic lines in the foreground layer(s).[14] Most of the time background
elements can be left out. There are, however, cases in which musical textures as such
obtain form-building significance. Thus the discussion of the complexity of form-
elements will have to apply both to lines (i.e. melodic/rhythmic elements) and to
textures.[15]

The typology of form-building elements is based on their complexity (see Figure 1):
Figure 1

o Very simple elements. Examples: repetitive figures with a couple of pitches and
even rhythmical values such as very simple accompaniment figures (lines);
monophony or basic homophony (texture).
o Relatively simple elements. Examples: articulated yet simple figures such as
scales/passages or refined accompaniment figures (lines); heterophony, or
homophony with slight polyphonic elements (texture).
o Medium complex elements. Examples: a classical, simple theme (lines); a two-
or three-part simple polyphony (texture).
o Relatively complex elements. Examples: complex themes with great diversity of
pitch and rhythm (lines); complex polyphony (texture).
o Very complex elements. Examples: extremely asymmetric lines using a large
number of values in an unpredictable manner (lines); accumulations in
electroacoustic and avant-garde music (texture).

The scale of complexity may to some extent be considered relative to the composition
or to the style of the composition that is being analyzed.

A form-element, e.g. a theme, will often be presented in its integral form, then broken
down by being partitioned into smaller units. The symmetrically opposite shapes of the
sign for partitioned elements may be used to suggest the opening or closing features of
the context or of the (often preceding) integral element from which they have been
partitioned.

The simple arrangement of degrees from simple to complex is, however, not sufficient
to describe a range of phenomena that is perceived as pertinent for the aural experience
of musical form. One such phenomenon is that of articulation, another that of distinction
(i.e. of being characteristic). When a form-element is well articulated, it is in possession
of a reasonable number of details that are distinctly perceivable as such. A high
articulation will be an additional feature of the middle range complexities. Most
classical themes are well articulated. However, passagework, soloist figurations etc.
may have medium complexity without being highly articulated; theme-like passages
have structural complexity, passagework ornamental complexity. Structural
complexity is by definition highly articulated, while ornamental complexity is not.

When a form-segment is distinctive, it has a character that tends to set it apart in the
particular piece in which it occurs to such a degree that, in hindsight, it could be
considered typical or representative for the piece as a whole. Distinction also means that
certain form-elements are unique to the particular piece in question, setting it apart from
other pieces within the same style. As an example, one may think of a piece of bebop
jazz that presents the theme to begin with; this will be a distinctive element. The
improvisations that follow will be characterized by passages and figurations, often
rather complex, but they will mostly be more typical of the genre of bebop jazz, or of
the player, than of the piece as such. These form-elements will not be marked out as
distinctive in our analysis. In order not to unduly complicate the method of analysis, we
have opted not to develop separate analytical tools for articulation and distinction, since
they often seem to be connected. If the need to draw a distinction were to arise, it would
be better to do so in a verbal commentary to the analysis.

The linear arrangement of elements from simple to complex will have to be reorganized
since that which was formerly a middle value, i.e. the medium complex form-element,
has now been taken to represent a maximum of distinction or articulation. At the
opposite extreme of high articulation and distinction we thus find the very simple and
the very complex grouped together as equivalent in being unarticulated and anonymous.
[16]

A form-building element that possesses high articulation or distinction will have a

horizontal line drawn through its sign. The signs for articulation and distinction can also
be used to qualify textures when these are sufficiently unique and characteristic. A
conceptual space that has been reorganized according to criteria of articulation and
distinction will look more like a circle than a line. To close the circle a new sign has
been added, one designed to show the combination of an internally complex, yet
globally simple form-building segment (see Figure 2).
Figure 2

3.2.2. Context Organization of Form-Elements

Form-building segments will be defined through the combination of form-elements (as

presented in the typology above) into an organized context. A form-segment is a
coherent succession of form-elements, where the evaluation of similarity and contrast
between adjoining elements will serve as the main criterion for determining what
belongs to the form-segment and what does not. Thus, when there is similarity between
juxtaposed form-elements, a coherent form-segment is easily created. Contrasts tend to
fragment coherent segments or set them off from each other; however, fragmented form
elements, too, can be held together in unifying gestalt (a phrase) due to other musical
dimensions, such as harmony, or constant background layers. Although the form-
segments generally tend to be a succession, there are also situations in which elements
are superposed in simultaneity.

In order to demarcate a form-segment in notation, a number of constituent form-

elements will be joined together by lines indicating identity or similarity (see Figure 3).

Figure 3 L. v. Beethovens Piano Sonata op. 2:1, movement I, first phrase [recording]

Breaking the line joining similar form-building segments indicates a greater degree of
contrast (see Figure 4).
Figure 4 L. v. Beethovens Piano Sonata op. 2:1, movement I, beginning of
development [recording]

In the above example, further precision is added through a sign specifying the degree of
similarity. This is one of a scale of 6 signs suggesting degrees of similarity (see Figure
5).[17]

Figure 5

A partitioning of an integral element will become a fragment if it is further abbreviated

or set off by pauses. A dot over the partitioned element or one breaking the line that
connects the form-elements of greater similarity will be used (see Figure 6).

Figure 6 L. Janacek, String Quartet, Kreutzer Sonata, movement 3 [recording]

The context organization will often reveal hierarchical structures in which shorter form-
segments combine to form larger segments (see Figure 7).

Figure 7 L. v. Beethoven op. 2:1 beginning movement I [recording]

When form-elements are superposed simultaneously in different layers, they may be

drawn on the vertical line. The preferred upper limit for displaying form-elements in
synchronicity would be no more than four elements on one line. As mentioned,
background elements may generally be left out (see Figure 8).
Figure 8 J. S. Bach, Ihr aber seid nicht fleischlich [recording]

If a more detailed analysis of simultaneous form-elements is desirable, the specific

indications of complexities can be integrated into a supplementary layer analysis.

When the superposition of form-elements reaches a certain complexity or merge

perceptually, they should be denoted as a texture, rather than single elements. Slurs
mark the transition from single elements to texture (see Figure 9).

Figure 9

3.2.3. Form-Building Transformations

The term form-building transformations describes a set of patterns that result from
characteristic combinations of types of form-elements. While the form-building
processes are concerned with patterns of recurrence, variation, and contrast, form-
building transformations are concerned with the logic of the organization of complexity
vs. simplicity, wholeness vs. division, lines vs. textures, distinctive vs. anonymous
passages.

Form-transformations can be either discontinuous or continuous. In a continuous

transformation the passage from one state to the opposite takes place in a linear fashion;
in the case of a discontinuous transformation (the normal case in classical music) the
passage may be step-wise, or may simply contrast the initial state of the transformation
with its end or its inverse. The transformation is also discontinuous when a linear
transformation is interrupted by sections of another character (see Figure 10).

Figure 10
Form-building transformations can take the form of alternation: the musical discourse
moves to and fro between two different states of a transformation.

Different types of form transformations are listed below. The transformations are non-
exclusive; i.e. they may be combined. For the sake of conceptual simplicity, they are
divided into four types:
Simple vs. complex, part vs. whole; few vs. many; distinctive vs. anonymous. Each
category is exemplified with two examples, one in a classical or romantic repertoire,
one from the modern repertoire (see Figure 11).
Figure 11

The transformation from complex to simple is termed simplification. The inverse

transformation is termed complication.
Figure 12 Simplification: F. Mendelssohn Bartholdy, String quartet op.44:1 [recording]

Comments to the analysis: This simplification comes after a process of partitioning the
main theme, and recombining the parts into a polyphonic play. (The transformations
liquidation and crystallization will be discussed in detail in the next chapter). The
relative contrast between the two simple bars at the end, and the relative complex
texture of the preceding fugato, may qualify it as a discontinuous transformation,
although the collection of the preceding polyphony into a synchronized chordal descent
serves to round it off, and prepare the introduction of the simple final section.
Figure 13 Simplification: G. Grisey, Modulations [recording]

Comments to the analysis: This example shows a continuous transformation of textures

that become simpler and simpler. The example has been considerably abbreviated.
Figure 14 Complication: L. v. Beethoven, Diabelli Variations, op 120 [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The example presents the beginning of three consecutive
variations (nos. 15, 16, 17) each of them with the same, underlying chordal progression.
The motivic elements remain relatively simple; however the textural element seems to
dominate over the melodic, and accordingly the analysis shows the development of
textural complexity. The transformation is discontinuous. The build-up in complexity is
supported by a step-wise increase in energy (dynamics, tempo, register); this, however,
is part of the dynamic form, thus belonging to another formal isotopy. Nonetheless, the
synergy between the two isotopies is evident.
Figure 15 Complication: I. Xenakis, Persephassa [recording]

Comments to the analysis: A continuous transformation (complication) passes from

regular pulses with some irregular elements, to a texture of irregular pulses, thus from
relatively simple to very complex texture.
 The transformation from integral (undivided) to partitioned (divided) is called
partitioning. The inverse transformation is called integration. This transformation is
also applicable to both lines and textures.

Figure 16 Partitioning: L. v. Beethoven, Piano Sonata op. 2:2 [ open in separate

window ]

Figure 17 Partitioning: W. Walton, Symphony no 2 [ open in separate window ]

Figure 18 Integration: F. Liszt: Eine Faust Symphonie, first movement [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The motive of (one of) the contrast theme(s) is prepared by a
few notes set apart by inserted brass fragments. The initial motive, despite taking part in
an integration transformation, is itself first partitioned, while the dynamic form leads
the process on to the forte presentation of the integrated theme.

Figure 19 Integration: A. V. Mosolov, Savod [ open in separate window ]

The exacerbation of the latter transformations is termed fragmentation and synthesis,

respectively. This transformation can also take place both with lines and textures.

Figure 20 Fragmentation: C. P. E. Bach, Keyboard Sonata in F sharp minor, Wq 52/4,

H37: No. 1 [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The music alternates between two highly divergent
characters, and there is no attempt to pave the way for the new by a rounded or finished
ending of the respective segments. The context, therefore, is fragmented.
Figure 21 Fragmentation: G. Ligeti, Etude 3 (Book 1) Touches bloques [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The end of this etude is a gradual transformation, brought
about by an increasing number of muted keys between the sounding ones. In the
preceding form segment (not presented here) there is another, more dramatic
presentation of a fragmented texture. It would be reasonable to state that synthesis
(opening of the piece) vs. fragmentation is an actual or thematized isotopy underlying
this piece, the indexical logic of which is derived from the play on muted vs. sounding
keys.
Figure 22 Synthesis: F. Liszt, Piano Sonata in b-minor [ open in separate window ]

Figure 23 Synthesis: L. Thoresen, Tradlarudl [ open in separate window ]

The transformation from single lines to several superposed lines (that still are
perceptible as lines) is termed proliferation, typical for starting with a few simple
elements, to which more are added. The inverse transformation is called collection: It
starts with a number of superposed elements, and ends with a simple one, or a simple
collection of the elements.

Figure 24 Proliferation and Collection: J. C. Bach, Sinfonia op. 18, no 1 [ open in

separate window ]

Figure 25 Proliferation: K. Stockhausen, Gruppen (1) [ open in separate window ]

Figure 26 Collection: W. Lutoslawski, Paroles Tisss [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The selected example begins with a proliferation of small
cells; eventually they fuse into a texture, while a new linear element is added on top,
continuing the proliferation. The sudden introduction of the solo line represents a
discontinuous collection of the previous proliferation.

A further development of the previous transformation happens when many

superposed lines become a texture (everything from a chord to a more intricate pattern);
this transformation is called fusion. The inverse transformation is called fission
(beginning with a texture which is dissolved into the perception of individual elements).
A common example in classical and baroque music would be the contrasting of
polyphony and homophony. A proliferation transformation a multiplication of
elements - can halt before the lines start integration into a texture; however if it does,
the proliferation may be seamlessly followed by a fusion. The Example from K.
Stockhausens Gruppen is a demonstration of this; it moves from proliferation to fusion.

Figure 27 Fusion: J. S. Bach, Omnes Generationes from Magnificat in D major

[ open in separate window ]

Figure 28 Fusion: K. Stockhausen, Gruppen (2 & 3) [recording]

Comments to the analysis: The sound example begins more or less where the previous
recording of Gruppen stopped, i.e. at a stage in which the linear element identification
of individual lines and instrument sounds tends to become difficult and the listening
mind changes its intentions from trying to perceive individual parts to grasping a global
object. At this point, the fusion takes place. This spot is not in any way marked by the
music; it takes place solely in the listeners mind, and the exact spot where it occurs,
cannot be objectively determined. At a certain point the complex texture
(accumulation it could be called, using a term from Schaeffers spectromorphology)
turns into a simpler texture of huge chords. This can be seen as another fusion; or it
could be conceived as an anamorphosis (discussed later). Long, linear evolutions, like
the one shown through the two examples from Gruppen, can sometimes be too
predictable to keep the listeners attention; but not so in this case. The composer has
ingeniously interspersed the evolution with surprises: sudden, interpolated single notes.
Thus a secondary element of collection runs counter to the general evolution
(proliferation). This aspect is not represented in the analysis shown.

Figure 29 Fission: G. F. Hndel, All We Like Sheep from The Messiah [ open in
separate window ]

Figure 30 Fission: W. Lutoslawski, Jeux Vnitiens [ open in separate window ]

A further development of the two previous cases occurs when a form segment
becomes extremely complex, loses inner articulation and is ultimately turned into a
simple, unarticulated segment. The transformation from extremely complex directly to
simple form segments is called anamorphosis; the inverse transformation
catamorphosis. Examples of this pair of transformations are rarely, if at all, found in
classical music, although they do occur occasionally in the avant-garde music of the
20th century. These transformations pass out from the ordinary context of polyphony
vs. homophony (fission vs. fusion), in that they carry the transformation to a complete
extreme by transforming texture into a simple sound object.

Figure 31 Anamorphosis: L. Thoresen, Ovringar, ending

Comments to the analysis: The example shows the end of Ovringar. It begins in the
middle of a very complex texture, which still can be heard as separate parts. From here a
fusion begins, which eventually (after the cut in the examples) continues as an
anamorphosis: the transformation of texture into sound, in this case noise (examples of
similar transformations are found e.g. in the music of T. Murail (Memoires, Erosions),
G. Grisey, and K. Saariaho).
Figure 32 Catamorphosis: L. Thoresen, Ovringar, opening

Comments to the analysis: This example shows the opening of Ovringar, analyzed as a
catamorphosis, the symmetric opposite of anamorphosis, which is the transformation
ending the piece. It shows the gradual passage from a relatively simple noise sound into
textures of increasing inner activity and articulation. Eventually a fission takes place and
a melodic element emerges.
The final pair of transformations listed, liquidation and crystallization, require a
definition of Prgnanz to be understood, and examples will be given at the end of the
next chapter.

3.2.4. Prgnanz

In the last pair of form-transformations discussed above, that of

liquidation/crystallization, one other characteristic of musical form is involved, namely
that of Prgnanz. This is an emergent quality considered essential for the presentation
of the classical theme, which thus deserves a more detailed discussion. The word
Prgnanz used in a musical context could be said to have two meanings: One would
suggest that we have an idea that gives birth to materials and ideas that are essential to
the further development of the composition. A theme in a sonata, as opposed to a
melody in a song, would have this quality.[18] The word can also refer to the gestalt
quality of the statement itself, and it is on this aspect of the concept we shall concentrate
in this context. In the latter sense, a pregnant form-segment is characterized by an
optimal combination of articulated, distinctive form-elements, contextual self-
affirmation and well-defined boundaries, and good continuation. Moreover, the form-
elements have to be sufficiently complex and articulated, and they can never belong to
the lowest category of differentiation (simple form-elements) or to that of extreme
complexity. The tendency towards articulation and complexity must, however, be
counterbalanced by a self-affirming or redundant context, which means that the form-
elements or segments must be repeated (exactly or varied) in the immediate context.

It would be reasonable to assume that the more complex the form-elements are, the
more repetitions could be allowed without losing Prgnanz (this still remains to be
demonstrated). Too much repetition, however, will lessen the Prgnanz of the form-
segment, just as, symmetrically, too much information will threaten its unity and
comprehensibility. To have well-defined boundaries, the pregnant gestalt needs to occur
in a phrase whose ending is clearly marked out in the context.

The criterion of a good continuation applies to the immediate surroundings of the

distinctive core statement of a pregnant gestalt. The beginning of the score statement
should preferably be well prepared by the previous score statement so the listener is
alerted to the coming of something important. After the important information there
should be a phase that allows for absorption of the information without introducing
anything significant and new, and the listener should moreover be alerted to the
imminent ending of the pregnant statement. In this way the listener will be able to
detach the information from the context, remember it outside the general flow of
temporal retentions and protensions, and transfer it to his/her long-term memory. The
musical information may now be consciously recalled and its return expected. The
articulated part of a pregnant statement should be surrounded by less important
surroundings (thus materials with more anonymity).

In a larger musical context, a pregnant theme presentation mostly serves to present

musical information in a fashion that is both comprehensible and memorable. Therefore,
a pregnant organization of the constituent motives of a particular piece into a distinct
theme will enhance the ability of the listener to comprehend the piece as a whole,
provided the remaining piece avails itself of the musical elements presented in the initial
gestalt. This latter condition is, in fact, one attribute of the phenomenon of Prgnanz
itself, namely the law of good continuation, and is moreover intrinsic to the
understanding of a theme as opposed to a melody.

One instance of the presentation of a distinctive thematic motive could look like this
(see Figure 12):

Figure 33

Here, two well articulated/distinctive form-elements are repeated in a clearly

demarcated phrase. What is not shown in this example is whether the criterion of good
continuation is fulfilled. The form-building transformation of liquidation creates a
context for the distinctive form elements that allows them both to stand out, and to be
absorbed by the listener. The liquidation process thwarts the balance between
information and redundancy in favour either of differentiation, or of redundancy, so that
distinctive materials can stand out in relation to less distinctive materials. If the less
distinctive materials are related to the distinctive ones, the effect of the liquidation is
also to allow the information to sink in and to be absorbed by the listener. The inverse
transformation we have termed crystallization suggesting the movement from looser to
firmer gestalts.[19]

The classical theme is the ultimate example of Prgnanz, combining firm gestalts with
the loosely organized form-segments, such as the ones used in passagework, transitional
passages etc., in the same way that a foreground presupposes a background. The
combination of repeated, self-affirming, characteristic motives in a context with looser
forms gives us the prototypical shapes of the ways in which a theme is presented in a
classical work: The Period (consisting of two major time segments, i.e. an antecedent
and a consequent, each of which begins with a distinctive motive followed by less
distinctive materials), and the Sentence (an initial repetition of the distinctive motive,
followed by transformations of the same motive, breaking it down to less characteristic
configurations) (see Figure 13).

Figure 34a Period: Mozart, Piano Sonata in A minor KV 310, 2nd movement
[recording]
Figure 34b Sentence: Beethoven, Piano Sonata in C major op. 2:2 [recording]

Crystallization is a less studied phenomenon; as a musical form it is probably the

creation of late classicism or early romanticism. It inverts the position of firm and loose
gestalts that we find in the classical sentence, by placing the loose material in front of
the core motive. One is given the impression of witnessing the genesis of a theme,
rather than being faced with a finished statement that has to be absorbed. The definitive
example of this type of transformation is the opening of Beethovens ninth symphony.

Figure 35 Crystallization: L. v. Beethoven, Symphony no. 9, mov. I [ open in separate

window ]

While liquidation and crystallization are linked to distinctiveness, they can be supported
by most of the aforementioned transformations. Examples have already been shown:

o Figure 12 (Mendelssohn's Quartet in D major) demonstrates a liquidation by

partitioning and followed by proliferation, terminating by simplification.
o Figure 18 (contrast theme in Liszts Eine Faust Symphonie) and 22: (The b-
minor sonata by F. Liszt) show a similar formal construction: The synthesis
transformation supports the crystallization transformation. After the theme is
presented in a firm gestalt, a liquidation through partitioning follows. The
formal pattern suggested is therefore symmetric: crystallization, repeated
presentation of distinctive materials, liquidation.
o Figure 24 (Sinfonia op. 18, no 1 by J. C. Bach) the transformations of collection
and proliferation are organized as a period: The antecedent consists of a focused
main motive (collection) followed by a proliferating segment; then a consequent
is constructed in the same way. The focus on collection and proliferation is
maintained in the transitional passage that follows, although the motives used
may only be distantly related to that of the characteristic motive.
o Figure 32 (Thoresen, beginning of Ovringar) shows a catamorphosis that is
being followed by a fission, as the result of which a melodic shape emerges (a
motive from a piece of archaic fiddle music. The catamorphosis and fission
realize a long-range crystallization transformation, reinforced by the forward-
oriented dynamic function, thus preparing the arrival of the folk tune in a
pregnant context (not included in the sound example).

The pregnant formulation of a musical statement is very much linked to the classical
conception of a characteristic and memorable theme the theme as the theorem. This
particular musical feature is seldom found in the contemporary music created during the
last 60 years; many composers whether of the serialist, spectralist, electroacoustic, or
minimalist schools, insisted on the importance of avoiding pregnant statements. An
example of a contemporary use of materials for this purpose is demonstrated in Figure
36.
Figure 36 Liquidation: L.Thoresen Illuminations [recording]

Comments to the analysis: At the very opening of this double concerto for two
violoncelli and orchestra a static sound prepares the listener to prepare for the erupting
fortissimo texture. This texture has a medium complexity, and is one of the most
characteristic textures of the piece. The next texture suggests a fission, presenting
melodic elements deduced from the motives used by the two solo cellos (not included in
the sound example); however the next textures are less articulated and of a simpler
kind. A backward leaning or reclining dynamic function supports the transformation
from complex to simple texture. Thus a virtual liquidation transformation is made
without linear elements.

In classical music, the normal way to carry out liquidation is through partitioning and
fragmentation. However, simplification, proliferation, fusion and anamorphosis are also
potential vehicles of liquidation. Similarly, the vehicle of crystallization is normally
integration, but can also be synthetization, complication, collection, fission and
catamorphosis.

However, the context organization of the form segments can also exert an influence on
the perception of Prgnanz. E.g. if the same distinctive element is repeated excessively,
it will become redundant and devoid of interest, thus in effect resembling a
simplification transformation that affects the very substance of the musical material.

3.2.5. Closing Comments

The preceding presentation of form-building transformations is not entirely complete,

since a study of listener modalities in relation to form-building transformations has been
left out in order to keep the length of this paper within reasonable limits. However, even
if that study had been included, the discussion of musical form would by no means be
comprehensive. At least two other form-building isotopies, namely form-building
functions, and form-building processes, still need to be discussed. Moreover the
articulation of musical gestalts into successive and simultaneous units will need to be
treated in detail. The Aural Sonology Project has developed detailed analytical
instruments for dealing with all of these dimensions. Additionally, the numerous ways
in which form-building isotopies interact remain to be examined. The form-building
isotopies mentioned in this article are basically syntactic; nevertheless, they can
occasionally be interpreted as metaphors for non-musical meanings. Semantically
oriented logics, e.g. narrative schemes, may interact with or override these three
isotopies. Indeed, neither theoretical, nor rational, nor structure-oriented discourses will
adequately and a priori cover the immense field of musical form.

It should be understood that the findings presented here are merely one component of an
inquiry that can probably never be carried to a conclusive end. As a composer I am
immensely grateful that this ultimate end is out of the reach of the theory, as the field of
creation thus remains open, and musical reality will always remain a source of wonder,
discovery and surprise.
In the early 19th century, the musical forms that were more or less spontaneously
created during the 18th century were analyzed and made into normative theory. For a
relatively short period of European music history, musical form was, at the same time, a
spontaneous musical practice and a normative theory. The more advanced composers of
the 19th century were, however, already developing formal conceptions that had by then
bypassed theoretical dogma. In ways that were not explicable, new musical forms often
made sense to the unprejudiced listener, not through their conformity with normative
conventions that existed in the listeners minds prior to hearing the music, but because
of the intrinsic logic of the sonic gestalts. The listeners were made to marvel at the
discovery of rational forms that eluded conceptualization. The rational syntax of the
music emerged to the listener as the music unfolded, quite independently of the
listeners preconceived notions of conventions for musical forms. The present approach
focuses primarily on such emergent musical forms.

The dissolution of tonality and the wish to avoid trite clichs has led composers and
theorists of the 20th century to become concerned with musical morphology. Modality,
polytonality, atonality and spectrality have been explored and explained. Moreover, the
desire to include new sonorities and textures in music (e.g. complex spectra, glissandi,
sound accumulations) has made it necessary to conceive of completely new
relationships between sound qualities and overall shape. However, the need to come to
grips with the new musical materials and their technique has allowed the discussion of
technical aspects of music production to monopolize the theoretical discourse on
contemporary music.

By conceptualization and objectification of certain emergent, form-building musical

gestalts, the present article has tried to give focus to possible patterns of musical order at
the level of musical form as heard. When a musical form makes sense, music enters the
mind of the listener, and this act of internalization is a prerequisite for the listeners act
of further making sense of the music: When coherent musical gestalts are formed and
internalized with the listener, they may in turn be understood in iconical and indexical
ways. In the examples above, we saw one clear example of this, when the formal
function of fission was used to symbolize sheep that had gone astray (Figure 29).

We have insisted on a blindfolded approach to analysis i.e. not using the score
during the process of making the analysis; this is one essential, though not exclusive,
way of accessing the musical phenomenon. Through this approach we hope to stimulate
and crystallize patterns of musical thinking that are sufficiently close to music for it to
be helpful for the reflected musician and composer. At the same time it represents a
fresh approach and a challenge to traditional academic approaches to musical theory and
analysis.