Bibliographic record
Abstract
Probing analyses, from the renowned music theorist, of Schubert's great, yet still little-studied piano-solo, chamber, and symphonic masterpieces. In his instrumental works, Franz Schubert, like Beethoven, expanded on the classical traditions, especially in the areas of form and harmony. Yet many of these works have only recently begun to be appreciated for their true worthby performers, listeners, and scholars. Schubert's Mature Instrumental Music , by renowned music theorist David Beach, is an analytical study of selected symphonic, chamber, and solo-piano works written during the last ten years of the composer's short life, beginning with the Trout Quintet (D. 667) and ending with the String Quintet (D. 956). Each of the chapters in part 1 focuses on a crucial topic: harmony, phrase rhythm, motive,and sonata form. These chapters will be accessible to all musicians and other readers who have some basic training in harmony and form. Part 2 presents detailed analyses of nine fascinating representative movements. Beach's insights will enrich the listener's experience of what are now recognized as some of the great masterpieces of the early nineteenth century. David Beach is Professor Emeritus and former Dean of the Faculty of Music atthe University of Toronto. He is the author of Aspects of Unity in J. S. Bach's Partitas and Suites: An Analytical Study , and coeditor of Bach to Brahms: Essays on Musical Design and Structure and Explorations inSchenkerian Analysis , all published by the University of Rochester Press.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".