The three music forms discussed in class are classic representations of “punctuated music.” The structure of a musical work takes on the dynamics characteristic of a particular form. For example, the form of an incomplete intonation contrasts with the complete form, similar to how an ellipsis has a different meaning from a complete stop. As for the listener, each form has its specific effect. An incomplete cadence requires different harmonic norms and may differ in sharper and softer transitions before a pause depending on the last sounds. The frequent repetition of forms is the basis of any popular piece of music: both song and dance. Each case carries its meaning: in dance, it becomes easier to learn and consolidate movements, and in a song – motive and words.
However, in recent times, even popular songs are now often moving away from frequent repetition in the form of the entire composition. In classical music, these repetitions were more complex and complex. For example, when the central theme of the motif occurred in the parts of various solo instruments – piano and violin, it underwent various variations on its theme and could return to its original form in a cyclic form. However, even the most frequent repetition in compositions had to dilute the repeating parts with others: interludes, bridges, verses. It is pretty challenging to develop a new form since there is already a non-reprise reprise consisting of three parts mathematically. Any combination of these forms leads to the repetition of one of the known forms, even if the issue is approached in a complex manner. For me, unique in its form and symbolism is Rondeau 14, “Ma fin est mon commencement” by Guillaume de Machaut, dating from the 14th century. In it, two seemingly independent voices go towards each other from beginning to end, creating a unique, inimitable form of the work.
Regarding musical instruments, I knew about their classical classification, but the systematization studied in the classroom seemed to me more modern and easy to understand. Firstly, this classification includes electrophones, instruments relevant to modern music, including sampled sounds of any other group from idiophones to chordophones. The possibilities of electrophones are almost limitless since it became possible to work on sound not only analog but also digital. Secondly, I was surprised by how diverse classical, traditional instruments are in different countries and, at the same time, represent different forms of chordophones, aerophones, or membranophones. The real mystery for me and the unique creation of progress is such an instrument as the theremin. The musician changes the distance from his hands to the instrument’s antennas, which also changes the pitch. In fact, there is not even physical contact between the instrument and the musician; all the influence takes place remotely.
Scott’s Raymond Electronium, a giant prototype of future synthesizers, is also an impressive instrument. There is a unique attitude to each sound extracted and an attempt to create a certain degree of convenience through the efforts of the progress of past years. Traditional musical instruments also abound with exciting specimens, such as the lituus or the sub-contrabass flute, but most fit into the above classification. Given the uniqueness of the process of synthesizing music in electronic form, which is not completely clear to me, at the moment, it is electrophones that are of greater interest to me in terms of the variety of sounds. However, this variety was formed thanks to many folk musical instruments, each of which has its history. In this regard, I am most interested in the history of the extraction of various types of sounds, and I will use the above classification as a starting point in this study.