Developing the Single-movement Sonata Form

The challenge of finding new ways to revive an old form.

By A Kirsch.

A new beginning

The formal structure which I shall call the single-movement sonata form is still work in progress: once new specimens of it emerge, this essay may have to be extended or amended. Which would only prove that the single-movement sonata form has the potential to be further developed and refined, and that lessons may be learned from any obvious problems or shortfalls manifesting themselves within the already existing pieces of this particular sub-type of the traditional symphonic genre (whose sole aim it is to condense the four movements of a sonata or symphony into one sonata-form movement)¹. Arnold Schoenberg had abandoned his experimentations with this form, presumably not because he did not see any further possibilities in it, or that he may have thought with his First Chamber Symphony of 1906 he had completed the perfect prototype, but rather he became interested in developing much shorter forms and through those a different way of expressing himself - as of course, he, in the process of this, broke off completely with tonality, being an indispensable requisite for the dialectics implied in any sonata form. After all, the musical genre of the Symphony was by then - after a journey of more than 150 years - deemed old fashioned and outdated. And when Schoenberg later returned to composing great forms they tended to be in the traditional three or four movement scheme - in which he intended to show that his newly developed twelve-tone technique was able to withstand the formal requirements of larger structures². Nowadays, more than a hundred years after his First Chamber Symphony, however, writing symphonies has become much more of a marginal occupation for many serious composers, often stigmatised by a reputation of conservatism or anachronism. However, to better understand the concept of the single-movement sonata form one has to first look back at how it all developed.

The evolution of the symphony and the sonata form from the pre-Classics to the late Romantics

The term Sinfonia was first given to the prelude of a Baroque opera or oratorio: Being mainly monothematic, there was a harmonic shift to the dominant area in the first part of the "A" section with a counter symmetrical move back to the tonic - often repeating the whole section; the "B" part mainly appeared in the tonic minor or a mediant key, followed by the Da Capo of the "A" section, without the repeats. The "B" part could also be a fugue in a faster tempo. 

A ground breaking development was introduced by the new-generation composers of the "Mannheimer Schule" from around the middle of the 18th century: Whilst generally expanding the old Da Capo form of the Baroque into three separate movements - fast / slow / fast - to create both the Classical Sinfonie and the Sonata³, they also elaborated a new approach to the tripartite form of the opening movement itself - from now on to be known as the sonata movement or sonata allegro. The old monothematic shift from the tonic to the dominant was replaced by a completely new second subject (or second 'group') on the dominant (or the parallel major for pieces in minor keys), which contrasted the opening subject or group and connected to the latter through a serious of basic modulations, with the second subject generally deemed to be more lyrical - or 'female' - compared to its more rhythmical - or 'male' - counterpart. Charles Rosen speaks of this fundamental compositional technique of the burgeoning Classical epoch as "creating drama" or tension, a process to become instantly familiar to its contemporary listeners until well into the 19th century. In the middle section, the contrasting themes were being 'developed' by undergoing a number of changes and modulations, until all tensions became resolved by the recapitulation of both groups, altogether in the tonic now and rounded up and brought to a conclusion in the final coda⁴.

Although Charles Rosen provides sufficient evidence to show that, after the turn of the 19th century,  Ludwig van Beethoven remained faithful to the fundamental principles of the Classical style until his very last string quartets, and that the metamorphosis into the Romantic era did not happen until Schubert and Schumann, there is no denying, however, that Beethoven introduced many changes which would influence the symphonic and sonata form for at least another century to come. These are, for instance: 

• The replacement of the Minuet with the Scherzo (often with a much faster tempo), which in the Ninth Symphony for the first time swapped places with the slow movement and followed straight after the opening movement; 
• The re-introduction of the Baroque fugue, mostly within the finale movements; 
• The use of voices in a symphony; 
• Indications of an underlying literary description (e.g. the five movements of the Pastorale); 
• The shift to a more dramatic build-up from the modulation to the second theme group into the central development section of a sonata movement and with this, the need for a larger coda to reaffirm the tonic at the end;
• The replacement of the traditional dominant / parallel major key with more remote mediant / submediant harmonies;
• The introduction of a third theme within the first movement (as during the development of the first movement of the Eroica); 
• And - most striking for the subject of this essay - overarching motivic cells which appear through several movements of the sonata or symphony, providing a coherence never experienced in a three or four movement work before (e.g. the Neapolitan semitone-step in the Appassionata, the "constant dominant seventh chords, the pulsating rhythms, and the descending scale a fifth long" (Rosen, p. 406) of the Waldstein, the rows of falling thirds in the Hammerklavier and, last but not least, the three-note repetitions which appear in the Fifth Symphony's both main theme groups, the Scherzo and again in the Finale).

Yet Beethoven's sonata forms traditionally consist of several physically detached movements, apart from the occasional attacca markings. The credit for the first symphony with interconnected, albeit still separate individual movements goes is given to Robert Schumann in his Symphony No. 4 in D minor op. 120 ⁵. Motivic material from the opening movement and its slow introduction spill into the Andante, Scherzo and Finale, but it is, most significantly, the omission of a recapitulation in the first movement which hands this function over to the Finale, therefore creating an overarching sense of one continuous sonata form.

Whilst Schumann's 4th - as well as the much earlier Wanderer Fantasie by Franz Schubert from 1820 - emphasize rather more on the cyclical succession of their four movements than on a single-movement sonata form, the opposite may be said of Franz Liszt's Piano Sonata in B Minor from 1853. Often regarded as the first real example of a single-movement sonata form, the piece has possibly been over-analysed by many renowned theorists, with the outcome that no agreement on the actual formal layout had been found. It is my opinion that this sonata first an foremost comprises one gigantic⁶ sonata form with an exposition, development, recapitulation and a coda, in which the development is intersected by a slow episode (a common occurrence during the romantic period), briefly introducing a new theme, and a short fugato episode leading back to what clearly is the recapitulation of the main theme, not an independent finale movement, and that it should be regarded as one movement with up to six distinguishable different formal centres, not a cyclic composition which consists of the traditional three or four movements of a conventional piano sonata. 

Liszt, however, continued to experiment with the single-movement sonata form in some of his symphonic poems ('Tasso: Lamento e trionfo', 1847-54; 'Die Ideale', 1856-57), as did the other great influencer of the late 19th and early 20th century, Richard Strauss ('Don Juan' op. 20, 1888-89; 'Ein Heldenleben' op. 40, 1897-98). These single-movement compositions have, of course, another combining factor which shapes their formal construction: an underlying literary program which therefore places them firmly into the genre of Programmusik and hence somewhat apart from the more abstract symphony or sonata⁷. And whilst certain programmatic episodes may be analysed as either single (internal) movements of a symphony, or individual sections of a sonata form, their main purpose remains that of a contrasting episode as indicated by their programmatic content. 

The single-movement sonata form in the 20th century - Arnold Schoenberg

Fast forward half a century from Liszt's B minor Sonata, to the last of the symphonic poems representing a single-movement sonata form, and whose composer later returned to the revival of this formal model within its original absolute setting (string quartet and symphony): Arnold Schoenberg's 'Pelleas und Melisande' op. 5 from 1902-03. Following the model of Strauss in a certain way, Schoenberg's intention, however, of creating a single movement symphonic structure outweighs the programmatic notions of the piece - in other words, the form becomes more important than the content. Alban Berg provided a much quoted analysis of the work, and many authors have followed in his footsteps. It is not my intention to give another interpretation of this piece, nor of the First String Quartet op. 7 (1904-05), or the First Chamber Symphony op. 9 which followed it in 1906⁸. I merely wish to highlight some of the struggles Schoenberg quite obviously faced in combining the four symphonic movements with the four sections of the sonata form, as well as admiring his achievements of overcoming some of the difficulties in each successive work. 

Whilst Pelleas still includes a number of programmatic episodes which, albeit briefly, interrupt the flow of the sonata form, they ensure nevertheless a sort of continuous sequence of the musical action, making this symphonic poem - just like its predecessors by Strauss, and despite its length (performing time approx. 40-45 mins.) - a coherent and thrilling piece to listen to. When returning to absolute music in his First String Quartet, Schoenberg suddenly lost the 'literary thread' which had helped all previous programmatic pieces to move through their individual movements or sections at a manageable and comprehensive pace. By attempting to include every single formal segment of a sonata movement and a four movement cycle, Schoenberg's quartet grows to almost epic proportions: 1,320 bars of music, or 42 - 45 minutes of performing time, making his op. 7 one of the most difficult pieces of music, even for the well trained listener!⁹ On the other hand, Schoenberg consciously favoured the thematic-contrapuntal interconnections between almost all the sections of the piece over a more formal clarity, thus showing off his extreme versatility in the art of developing variation and counterpoint. 

To illustrate the dilemma of form - or expanse -  versus structure in a more systematic way, I list below the various 'building blocks', or segments, of a classical symphony or sonata (or string quartet etc.):

The total number of segments (excluding transitions etc.) amounts to 30 (with repeats 39)¹⁰. If there was an average 16 bars per segment, the entire piece comprises a total of 450 (624) bars; if there were 32 bars in each segment, the total number would bypass 1,200 bars and almost reach the size of Schoenberg's quartet!¹¹

As we said, the thematic connections throughout the piece are so detailed, that even the smallest segments are to be considered only in relation to events before or after, and that this further clouds any easy way to comprehend the larger formal aspects. It is little surprising, that most analysts - including Schoenberg himself - have different views as where to situate the end of one formal section or movement and the beginning of another. 

In his First Chamber Symphony op. 9, however, Schoenberg managed to overcome most of the structural problems he faced before: The individual parts of the piece (movements as well as sonata sections) are clearly recognizable, aided by a 'motto' - a sequence of raising fourths - which he introduced here for the first time¹² and which predominantly reappears at the beginning of each new part of the symphony (Although a little uncertainty remains with regards to the beginning of the Finale and the Coda.). Themes relate to each other just as you would expect them to do in a sonata form, and the proportions of the movements, or sections, are so well balanced and concise to allow for a performing time of no more than 25 minutes - just over half of that of the quartet!¹³

Presumably, Arnold Schoenberg must have been fairly pleased with his Chamber Symphony, or at least he decided that there was nothing more for him to extract from further developing the single-movement sonata form as he went on to compose shorter, atonal pieces which cut the ties not only to conventional functional harmony but often also to the existing formal principles which accompanied them. And out of this he most famously created his 'method of composing with twelve tones'. 

There were, of course, countless more specimens of single movement symphonies, sonatas and so forth by other composers to follow throughout the 20th century, some of which even attempted to include the four-movement structure within a sonata form. Amongst the most notable attempts Samuel Barber's First Symphony in One Movement  op. 9  from 1935-36 and Jan Sibelius' famous Symphony No. 7 op. 105 (1924) come to mind, as well as the Piano Sonata Op. 1 by Alban Berg and the Piano Sonata No. 1 op. 66 by Cyril Scott (both from 1909), the piano sonatas and symphonic works from Alexander Scriabin's late period, or the piano sonatas by Nicolai Medtner, although these did not concern themselves with the multi-movement concept. However, no one seems to have gone far beyond merely experimenting with the combination the two great formal principles of the Classical and Romantic period, the sonata movement and the symphonic cycle.¹⁴

As Steven Vande Moortele illustrates in his study on "Two-Dimensional Sonata Forms", none of the compositions he discusses (Liszt, Strauss, Schoenberg and Zemlinsky) manage to achieve a complete overlap of the four movements of the "cycle" (sonata, symphony etc.; i.e. Allegro, Scherzo, Slow movement, Finale with Coda¹⁵) and the four sections of the "overarching sonata form" (i.e. exposition, development, recapitulation, coda), but they have several "interpolated" movements which each interrupt the flow of the sonata movement - or vice versa, some "exocyclic" sections of the sonata form which cannot be allocated a place within the four-movement symphonic cycle. They create, according to Vande Moortele, "a very strong tension between both dimensions. [...] Although composers relentlessly attempted to solve this tension, it never entirely disappeared: the complete integration of both dimensions in a two-dimensional sonata form failed."¹⁶  The challenge for a composer who wishes to prove that it may yet be possible to achieve such an integration and to further develop the single-movement sonata form - building on the 'mistakes' which have been noted in the existing historic examples - should be as follows: How to increase formal clarity whilst condensing its thematic content by cutting out any non-essential elements? The answer to this may well be straight forward and can be found in the very beginnings of the sonata form itself.

Taking on the challenge - looking back at the roots of the sonata form and establishing a new, simplified formal outline of the single-movement sonata form

The aim is to achieve a single-movement sonata form whose individual sections and movements, that is the combination of both, can be more the less easily recognised by simply listening to the music, even without reading a copy of the score, just as a sonata allegro by Haydn, Mozart or the early Beethoven sounds fairly comprehensible to any educated listener. Even a first-time listener of a new single-movement sonata form should be confidently able to distinguish the exposition/opening movement from the development/slow movement (or Scherzo) and the recapitulation/finale as well as the coda. 

It would hereby be helpful to take a brief look at a 'model' sonata allegro from the Classical period, but as this essay is not meant to be another analytical discourse, I would like to invite the reader instead to follow this rather straightforwardly illustrated overview of Beethoven's Piano Sonata op 2,1 in F minor - I. movement:¹⁷ 

What strikes in this example - and many others of the time - is the strict proportions of each of the segments: There are 8 bars main theme, 12 bars transition, 20 bars subordinate theme, 8 bars codetta (closing theme), which totals 48 bars of exposition; followed by 52 bars of development; then followed by 8 bars main theme, 11(!) bars transition, 20 bars subordinate theme, 13 bars coda, totalling 52 bars recapitulation, thus dividing the movement into roughly three equal parts. Considering the fact that the exposition should conventionally be repeated, the split is more towards 2:1:1.¹⁸ 

The harmonic structure follows the above in a similar way: after the initial 8 bars in the tonic key of F minor, almost the whole of the recapitulation stays in the tonic, too, which gives us about 60 bars within this key.¹⁹ The 28 bars of the exposition in the tonic parallel of Ab major are preceded by 12 bars of modulation during the transition and followed by some 32 mainly modulatory bars during the development, and another 20 bars on the dominant pedal point (including the retransition), with an approximate 2:3 ratio between tonic and non-tonic harmonies - but a 1:2 ratio if the exposition is being played twice.

It is trying to assimilate this strict harmonic and formal framework which may hold the key to a new approach to the single-movement sonata form, as long as its 'blueprint' can be sufficiently amended in order to accommodate the four movements on top of the existing sonata structure. 

There are several main problems to consider: the role of the exposition, the transitions, and the combination of recapitulation and finale.

Hence I have come up with the following basic model which almost completely avoids any interpolations of movements, or sections the way we have seen in the works by Liszt, Strauss and Schoenberg, thus providing a far simpler formal layout:

Let's have a look at the complete exposition of the sonata form in more detail:

 

The most obvious issue arising from this model of the exposition is its proportion of almost half of the overall piece (i.e. 2 out of 4 main sections - cf. the Beethoven example above, however, where a similar proportion is achieved if its exposition is repeated); the proportions of its two subject groups are also unusually drawn out, ternary in nature, with several sub-segments to each part. However, as we will see, the overall equilibrium of the piece can somewhat be restored simply by the larger scale of the later recapitulation section (in its form as a Rondo-Finale). 

Regarding the transitions, these tend to be - in relation to the theme groups - rather short, and it becomes apparent that in most cases the position of the coda/codetta (or closing group) coincides with the transition from one formal segment to another, as well as from one tonal centre to the next. As one being a closing element, the other a connecting one, I feel that there is no perfect solution, and that this matter constitutes one of the weak points of the overall formal model. After all, one must be prepared to compromise occasionally, as long as the outcome is structurally convincing as well as aesthetically pleasing. 

On the other hand, the role of the recapitulation and of the finale have occupied each of the composers of the previously discussed pieces. In most examples, the finale became associated with the coda rather than the recapitulation, or interjected between both, which lead to a further disjunction of the synchronisation of the elements of form and movement. 

In my blueprint, however, both the recapitulation and the finale overlap precisely as follows:

Now that a formal plan has been established it may be appropriate to analyse two of my works where this scheme has been implemented in practise: the String Quartet No. 2 "Choros" and the Organ Symphony No. 1 on Lutheran Christmas Chorales.

Both pieces follow in much detail the above blueprint, and whilst the thematic material in the quartet consist of Brazilian "choro" melodies from the 1st half of the 20th century, the organ symphony uses ancient Protestant chorales from the Advent and Christmas seasons.

As we can see from the formal plans a number of different themes is required, ideally three for each subject group / movement. In case of the main theme group in the quartet (i.e. its first movement), the opening "choro" can be conveniently separated into three different sentential segments, preceded by an opening motto, and providing a 1st theme (mostly polyphonic), a transitional theme (which completes the 1st subject) and 2nd theme (homophonic). For the second subject group (2nd movement / Scherzo) two further "choros" are added. In the subsequent development (3rd or slow movement) and recapitulation (4th movement / Rondo-Finale) all the preceding "choro"-themes are elaborated and repeated, albeit each in a modified appearance. The motto reinstates itself throughout the piece at the beginning of a number of important structural sections.²⁰

In the organ symphony each of the two subjects of the first movement is being allocated one specific chorale, whilst in the 2nd (slow) movement the middle section consist of the second half of the movement's chosen chorale. A novelty here is that in the 3rd movement (development / Scherzo) a fourth chorale melody is newly introduced as a trio section, which reappears only infrequently during the remainder of the piece. The opening motto is taken from the first few notes of the 1st subject's chorale, this chorale itself - in analogy with the quartet - being presented mainly polyphonically, up and until the double-fugue of the final Coda. 

Whilst - at least on paper - all seems to fit together nicely, there are certain downfalls in both pieces which cannot be ignored in order to further improve the single-movement sonata form: The allocation of the whole 1st movement to the exposition's 1st subject group, and the whole 2nd movement (be it a Scherzo or slow movement) to the 2nd subject group increases significantly, as was said before, the proportions of the exposition in relation to the whole piece. In addition, the transitional sections often double as codas or codettas whose modulations from one tonal centre to the other can be seen as little convincing. The number of different themes in the piece may also lead to the finale being thematically and structurally overloaded. I also prefer the main development section to be situated within the slow movement (as in the quartet) since the combination of a scherzando-character and developmental elaborations (in the organ symphony) proved to be more difficult.²¹ 

Future pieces within this particular genre may have to be more concise with regards to the length of their individual subject groups and pay more attention to the linking and closing parts, whether a transition or a codetta, or both. This main criticism would apply equally to the exposition, i.e. the first two movements, and to the recapitulation / finale. The overall timing for such a piece should be no more than 15-20 minutes, as anything above would carry the risk of adding to any possible confusion as we have seen in the examples of Liszt, Strauss and Schoenberg. After all, many symphonies, sonatas, quartets etc. before the end of the 18th century, despite their three or four individual movements, have a performing time of little more than 20 minutes. In his First Chamber Symphony Arnold Schoenberg came closest to these ideal proportions. 

A final thought on "borrowing" existing tunes

For a contemporary composer of the 21st century it seems strangely out of date - even for my standards - to simply "invent" new motives, themes and subjects. Hence it came to mind, that various types of existing tunes may fulfil the purpose of providing the thematic material for the two subject groups required within the sonata form. Consideration for potential copyright issues aside, those tunes would have to be carefully selected: they should provide sufficient interest and variety in terms of melody, rhythm and harmony; they should avoid anything which may be too catchy, four-square or sequential; and they should not originate from any larger piece, such as an existing symphony, sonata, opera etc. as these would otherwise already been associated with that piece: After all, the themes of Beethoven's - and others' - symphonies belong just there and nowhere else! 

I found that the following types of melodic sources are most rewarding: ancient tunes such as Gregorian chants (a favourite with many composers of organ or choral music) or Protestant chorales - as can be seen by their extensive use in Bach's Orgelchorälen or Max Reger's Choralphantasien; Folk songs from the British isles - which have been very popular with Haydn, Beethoven or Mendelssohn; or South American, especially Brazilian or Argentinian, tunes - as they are often harmonically colourful as well as rhythmically sophisticated. 

Likewise, I would avoid many of the Germanic folkloric music, although this had been very much the source of inspiration for Schubert, Brahms or Mahler, or anything indeed already associated with the "lighter muse", the likes of operetta or chanson - anything basically being too popular to serve a serious attempt to create large-scale musical compositions. 

Does using "borrowed" tunes mean a return to Neoclassicism? Perhaps in a way, but not identical to the style introduced about a century ago. It is neo-"classical" because these tunes mostly require a tonal harmonisation, just as the sonata form itself seeks to establish different tonal centres. However, there is absolutely no intention to recreate that light, serene atmosphere the way it was introduced, say, by Prokoviev in his Symphonie Classique, Strauss' Burgeois Gentilhomme, or by Stravinsky, Malipiero and many others. The chosen tunes can be transformed, developed, varied or polyphonically juxtaposed in whatever way deemed suitable and can produce, as a result, any given sonority or harmonic progression, as long as these themes fulfil their roles in respect to the overall form, and in particular their role within the framework of the single-movement sonata form.

Where do we go from here? I have no doubt that there will be future works written as single-movement sonata forms. These may, hopefully, attempt to create a clearer, streamlined and therefore easier to comprehend version of this genre as those written more than a century ago, with all due respect to the great masters who composed them. If and when new works appear we will be able to have a look how they compare to the formal schemes established above. Just as I said in the beginning: this is still work in progress.

Alexander Kirsch,

Blackpool, in August 2020

************************************************

A new work by the author: Organ Symphony No. 2 on Gregorian Easter Chants

In this latest addition to the single-movement sonata form, I have attempted - just like Schoenberg did in his First Chamber Symphony - to condensate the formal and thematic processes to achieve a much more stringent and comprehensible single-movement form, just as mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, which should enable the listener to easily distinguish not only the four symphonic movements (Sonata movement, Scherzo, Slow movement, Rondo-Finale²²), but also the corresponding sections of the sonata form. This has resulted in a much shorter piece (approximately 19'30'' minutes of performing time).

Having prepared a colour-coded video analysis (https://youtu.be/ch2ByKnnoiI), the following illustration, summarising this analysis, clearly shows how the coloured areas each correspond with the formal sections of the piece: 

It is hoped that any feedback to this latest piece may confirm the simplification of the formal entity of the work, without compromising, however, any of its fundamental single components and the overall connection between the themes - here the chosen Gregorian Easter chants - and the sonata form.

A. Kirsch

Blackpool, in January 2021

                                                                                                

Notes:

1. I have chosen in this essay to call the particular formal phenomenon discussed here simply a "single-movement sonata form", although this does not explicitly explain the fact that the four movements of a symphony or sonata are being included within. Arnold Schoenberg himself had not devised a specific term for it, nor had any of his predecessors; he only briefly referred to his First String Quartet op. 7 (in an article from 1907) as a work having the four movements of a classical quartet, these blended together "in an attempt to create a single unified, uninterrupted movement." (see The Schoenberg Guides, p. 161)

More than half a century later William Newman coined the expression "double-function sonata form" in his analysis of Liszt's Piano Sonata in B Minor, whilst Steven Vande Moortele in his 2009 study created the term of "two-dimensional sonata form". Both have their valid reasons for choosing their respective nomenclatures, yet I did not wish to adapt either of them; to be precise, I would have liked to call it  a "4-in-1 sonata form" would this not have alluded too much to modernistic marketing-speak.

The main difference between Newman's and Vande Moortele's models is that the former advocates a complete overlap of the sonata form segments with the symphonic movements, whilst the latter believes that in each of the works he analyses (including the Liszt sonata) there are certain elements of "identification, interpolation, and exocyclic units" (Steven Vande Moortele, Two-Dimensional Sonata Forms, p. 24; Leuven University Press, 2009). For my own interpretation, see below; for a number of further terms created by other authors, see Vande Moortele, 2009, p. 28f.

2. see, for example, the Third and Fourth String Quartet op. 30 (1927) & op. 37 (1936), the Violin Concerto op. 36 (1934-36), Piano Concerto op. 42 (1942) and his unfinished opera Moses and Aaron (1926-32); in 1939 Schoenberg completed a Second Chamber Symphony op. 38, which only has two movements and in which he returned to tonality.

3. The addition of a Minuet - later replaced by a Scherzo - in third position was initially introduced by Johann Stamitz (1717 - 57); many of Mozart's and Haydn's earlier symphonies, sonatas and chamber works only contained three movements.

4. Sadly our "modern" ears have become far too accustomed to the extended and more and more dissonant harmonies of the late 19th and 20th century to be less able to actually perceive the particular "drama" of moving the tonal centre to the dominant, as paradox as it may sound; we are more likely to associate with "drama" the increasing modulations and build-ups taking part during the development section, as their pace of change is more akin to our modern soundworld, than the simpler and rather coherent establishment of a new dominant tonality. For a thorough analysis of the music of the 18th century - and in particular the music of Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven -, see Charles Rosen The Classical Style; Faber and Faber Ltd., London 1971

5. actually not his fourth, but originally in second place when performed as a Symphonische Fantasie in 1841; after revision in 1853 it was published as No. 4 and allocated op. 120

6. performing time ca. 32'

7. see full analyses on the above tone poems / symphonic poems by Liszt & Strauss in: Vande Moortele, 2009, pp. 59 - 99

8. for detailed analyses of Schoenberg's single-movement works by various renown authors, please refer to the bibliography below

9. see Alban Berg's article "Warum ist Schönbergs Musik so schwer verständlich?" ("Why is Schönberg's music so difficult to understand?"); in: Arnold Schönberg zum 50. Geburtstage, 13. September 1924. 

10. note that here the development segments are just counted as one; in theory there maybe more than one segment to a development section, i.e. the retransition to the recapitulation.

11. where the first subject group alone stretches over 96 bars. Alexander Zemlinsky's Second String Quartet op. 15 (1913-15) also exceeds 1,200 bars, with around 40 minutes performing time; modelled on Schoenberg's first, it is another fine example of a single-movement sonata form. By contrast, Liszt's B Minor Sonata counts 760 bars, Schoenberg's Pelleas und Melisande 646 bars and his First Chamber Symphony 594 bars.

12. see Schoenberg's Fundamentals of Musical Composition, p. 202: "A striking, motto-like beginning is a useful feature"; Faber and Faber, London 1967

13. Reinhold Brinkmann claims that "the step from the [first string] quartet toward the [first chamber] symphony discloses a process of more pronounced outlining and integration." See in particular chapter 5. Form of his noteworthy essay on the First Chamber Symphony op. 9 - The Compressed Symphony, in: Schoenberg and His World, pp. 141-161, Princeton University Press, 1999.

14. not to forget Franz Schreker's Kammersymphonie (1916), which forms a large sonata movement but with less emphasis on its overall architectural and cyclical structure.

15. or: Allegro, Slow movement, Scherzo, Finale with Coda

16. Vande Moortele; 2009, p. 202

17. Courtesy of Andrew Schartmann's YouTube channel.

18. Only in the "Urtext" Edition by the G. Henle Verlag (ed. Hans Schmidt), 1971, are repeat signs printed for the first and second part of the movement; most interpreters, however, will only repeat the exposition.

19. not regarding about 8 bars of the transition during the recapitulation as a modulation, but rather as an enhanced half cadence I⁷-IV-II^-9-V.

20. for full details refer to the relevant blog post: String Quartet No. 2 "Choros".

21. I may be mistaken, as it was some time ago, but I am quite sure that in a lecture given by the pianist, composer and Schoenberg scholar Stefan Litwin in the early 1990ies he seemed to have proposed that the second section of Schoenberg's Pelleas und Melisande, which has in most interpretations been labelled as the Scherzo movement containing a number of episodes, should at the same time be considered as the actual 2nd subject group of the overall sonata form, and that the third section / slow movement constituted mainly the development section; in this case, a formal plan which developed on the "double-function" form applied to the Liszt sonata by William Newman, and similar to the blueprint I established above, would have been suggested. With this knowledge in mind, the structure of my 2nd string quartet had been drafted.

22. Please note that the position of Scherzo and slow movement has been reversed in comparison to the Organ Symphony No. 1.

Bibliography:

- Berg, Alban: The Schoenberg Guides; in: Analysen Musikalischer Werke von Arnold Schönberg, (Alban Berg: Sämtliche Werke, ed. Rudolf Stephan und Regina Busch, III. Abteilung: Musikalische Schriften und Dichtungen, Band 1), Vienna: Universal Edition, 1994.

- Brinkmann, Reinhold: The Compressed Symphony: On the Historical Content of Schoenberg's Op. 9; in: Schoenberg and His World, Walter Frisch (Ed.); Princeton University Press, 1999

- Dahlhaus, Carl: Liszt, Schönberg und die große Fom: Das Prinzip der Mehrsätzigkeit in der Einsätzigkeit; in: Die Musikforschung, 41pp. 202 - 213

- Frisch, Walter: The Early Works of Arnold Schoenberg, 1893 - 1908; University of California Press, Berkley - Los Angeles 1993

- Newman, William: The Sonata Since Beethoven, pp. 371 - 378; The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill 1969

- Rosen, Charles: The Classical Style, Faber and Faber, London 1971

- Schoenberg, Arnold: Fundamentals of Musical Composition, ed. Gerald Strand and Leonard Stein; Faber and Faber, London 1967

- Style and Idea, ed. Leonard Stein; Belmont Music Publishers, 1975 

- Vande Moortele, Steven: Two-Dimensional Sonata Form: Form and Cycle in Single-Movement Instrumental Works by Liszt, Stauss, Schoenberg, and Zemlinsky; Leuven University Press, 2009

- Webern, Anton: "Schönbergs Musik"; in: Arnold Schönberg. Mit Beiträgen von Alban Berg et al. München 1912