Talk:Subject (music)

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Music theory Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

• Talk:Theme (music)
  redirected here 11:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC).

Why should this article be merged with

So, it seems that "theme" is a slightly more general concept than "subject". A subject is always a melody; whereas a theme is merely usually a melody. But I also have a feeling that the distinction is not written in stone. Anyway, I think the theme article should include something about "subject" and "subject" should redirect to the theme article. Squandermania (talk)

Agree – merge; one sentence is not enough for an article. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:28, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support, wholeheartedly (although the stub is no longer entirely unreferenced). Even though the term actually pertains solely to fugue, it seems to me best merged here, with specific discussion of its usage left to the "Fugue" article.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:32, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support. A countersubject is a type of theme so you could add it to the first paragraph of the section, "In different types of music", where subject is addressed. Squandermania (talk) 11:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. A countersubject plays a specific role in polyphonic music when the next voice part enters. It is not a theme in itself, rather it is an extension of the subject and creates the note against note counterpoint that is characteristic of this type of music. The use of countersubject is featured in many of the masterworks of Bach and other great composers. Without this separate article, where will students of music turn to find a clear explanation of this concept? If the only issue is that the article is unreferenced, then solve the problem some other way. These articles should not be merged. MusicTree3 (talk) 05:34, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "Countersubject" article has not been unreferenced since 8 June 2012, if that makes a difference. In response to the question "where will students of music turn to find a clear explanation of this concept?", I would have thought the answer was obvious: the article Fugue. You are perfectly correct, however, that neither a subject nor a countersubject is a "theme" as usually understood.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 06:09, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Disagree—Counterpoint does not have themes in the way that music of the Classical and Romantic eras has. The only logical place to merge would be to Fugue. However, even the first edition of Grove has a separate article. I can see no reason why we shouldn't also. If the problem now is that this article is a stub, then use Parry's article in Grove to expand it. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 04:07, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Disagree per MusicTree and Beeswaxcandle. A countersubject is a separate musical and theoretical idea in counterpoint, and has nothing to do with theme. As this article has been expanded, adequate sourcing is now provided, and no editor has commented on this discussion in over a year, unless someone objects, I think we can consider this discussion closed and remove the notification from the
  Countersubject page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clegs (talk • contribs
  ) 03:38, 6 December 2014

NoeticaTea? 00:13, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]