Talk:Ternary form

	Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Music theory, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of music theory, theory terminology, music theorists, and musical analysis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Music theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Music theoryTemplate:WikiProject Music theoryMusic theory articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Ternary form be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

examples of composers using ternary form a lot!

this would probably be very useful!!

thinking ternary

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

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

Brahms?

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

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

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]