Jump to content

Talk:Ternary form

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

examples of composers using ternary form a lot!

[edit]

this would probably be very useful!!

thinking ternary

  • purcell (dido and aeneas particulalrly!)
  • handel
  • strauss!!

thanks, ksood 19:55, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Brahms?

[edit]

Don't we mean Mozart!? I believe Brahms only wrote two piano concertos and his works don't have K numbers.

Wandering piranga (talk) 20:31, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Defining ternary form

[edit]

Why is ternary always A-B-A and never A-B-C (3 distinct sections; all clearly different)?? Georgia guy (talk) 15:25, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the term is used only for A–B–A; I would describe A–B–C as a piece in three movements. Are you thinking of particular examples? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What kind of form is that?? Georgia guy (talk) 14:52, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(Corrected my spelling mistake: "thre" to "three".) I don't understand the question; there are thousands of works in three movements and there is no prescribed form for them. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:34, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think "Georgia guy" was asking, not about pieces with three movements, but about A-B-C structure (three distinct sections) within a movement. The answer is simple. With no repetition, there is no structure; movements may be divided into "sections" by double-bar lines on the page, but you do not hear them. A-B-C would not, structurally, be any different from A, a single long section with no repetition. (Similarly, binary form is not A-B but A-A-B-B; again, the repetition is what allows us to talk about "A" and "B" as distinct sections.) 2.25.131.30 (talk) 16:24, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Additional citations

[edit]

Why, what, where, and how does this article need additional citations for verification? Hyacinth (talk) 02:27, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tag removed. Hyacinth (talk) 07:02, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tag replaced. Sorry, Hyacinth. For "why?": It's been a while since I've read the Benward & Saker book, but I'm almost certain that a lot of what's in this article is not in there. Plus, there are some statements here that are highly unlikely, if not outright untruthful, like "The first section of a piece in ternary form does not usually change key", and "The middle section will generally be in a different key, often the subdominant of the first section". Almost every Minuet or Scherzo movement contains a modulatory contrast within the A section, and the B section is usually in the dominant, not subdominant. For "where?", I have tagged specific places where I thought a citation was needed. Just trying to point out where and how I think the article can be improved. I'll work on it later myself; see if I can find some additional sources. Mahlerlover1 (converse) 00:52, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]