Wolfgang Mozart Analysis
 

Hey guys!
My name's Joey.. I'm new to the forums.
I'm an aspiring young, freshman Musician at a University in the East.
I've always admired music, but had no background in studies before attending this college.

This post is in regards to an assignment I was given in my very first music class. I was directed to formally break down Mozart's symphony no. 40.

All aspects of the assignment have been completed, except one.

I am looking for help in determining SPECIFIC timings of the song, creating a simple formal diagram.

So far I, understand that it is sonata form, so I know that it will break down like this:
1) Primary Theme
2) Bridge
3) Secondary Theme
4) Development
5) Primary Theme Repeated
6) Bridge #2
7) Secondary Theme Repeated
8) Coda

HOWEVER- I can not determine exactly when the primary theme turns into a bridge, or when the second theme turns into the development, etc.

My question to you- can someone provide me with specific timings of when the formal diagram changes, so i can have a better understanding of what it truly means for the theme to change, and also so i will have a better understanding of ideas such as bridges?
(Example- primary theme.. 0:00 - x:xx.... bridge #1.. x:xx- z:zz.. etc.)

Any help would be appreciated.
Thank you,
Joe

Ps. here's the link for the piece-

Mozart, Symphony No. 40 in G minor, first movement - YouTube

I have this entire symphony analyzed on a score. If you have a score with you, I can tell you the exact measures where everything breaks down like that.

I do not have a score, however I actually am now aware of the specific timings in the piece (not sure if it's 100% accurate).

If you could help me dissect it by exact times in the youtube link attached it would mean the world, as for I can not make heads or tails of the piece.

1st Theme (bars 1-28)
Bridge Passage (bars 28-43)
2nd Subject (bars 44-100)
Development (bars 101-164)
Recapitulation 1st theme (164-184)
Bridge Passage (184-227)
2nd Subject (227-260)
Outro (261-299)

I need to link up the changing of the bars with specific times in the video, and that is where I am having the problem. If that makes any sense

I can try!

classical music sounds complicated as f

I feel sorry for you - music isn't something to analyze but enjoy. Good Luck
I can play this by ear on flute or piano maybe bc IMO it is one of his simpler pieces.

When you enjoy something enough, the analysis can bring a deeper enjoyment. It's the difference between knowing that you enjoy something, and knowing why you enjoy it. I'm a musician myself, and this kind of study can reveal profound observations - of course only if you study truly great works such as a symphony by Mozart - in lesser composers there might not be so much to discover, no matter how hard you try.

I agree, and it is especially important for a musician or composer. As you learn the theory, it becomes second nature and aids in expression, just like learning a language. Sure, you can communicate with very poor grammar and spelling, but you can communicate far easier, more fluidly and more accurately by knowing the rules, which do not always have to be followed strictly.I have studied music theory for many years and even took two courses of it at university.

I don't have time at the moment to help directly, but can offer advice.

In that time period, the "rules" were more clearly laid out. Before determining actual parts/themes, find ALL of the cadences. Themes and parts typically end with a stronger cadence than variations do (say, a perfew authentic or imperfect authentic at the end of a part and maybe a half or plagal between variations within a part).

Another thing to look for are key changes, which usually aren't written out-right (say a double bar line then the new time signature), but are usually done via modulation (chords like V7/iii → "iii" [of the new key]).

Then look at the actual progressions between cadences, ignoring ornamental things like non-chord tones, and see if any of them have the same pattern (say movement up by fourth, down by third, up by second, down by fifth).

What if you enjoy analyzing?

Reminds me of something Miss Manners said in one of her books. (!) She said I don't know of any difference between thinking you are happy, and being happy.