How to classify your own works

[ferago42]

Hello all. I've started composing for the piano, but I'm puzzled as how to organize one's work. At the begining I used to write one- or two-piece works, in binary or ternary forms. Now I'm trying to go to three or four-piece works.

The thing is, pianist used to group their works by opus. I don't like, however, to write a set of specific pieces, such as 24 preludes, but rather to have some variation. And not dance-related variations (that is, no minuets, allamandes, gigues, etc.). Most of the pieces I have written, they are in binary or ternary forms, and only recently I've considered using sonata form.

So, how would you call such works? Just saying Op 1, Op 2, etc., doesn't seem complete, and I can't say Sonata No 3 Op 7 because, well, none of my pieces are in sonata form. And I don't like to just assign a random names, like "Vals over the seas".

So, any thoughts? Or, and this could hold true, am I overthinking too much?

Best regards!

[marijn1999]

I just never start writing a piece before I know what it's gonna be. Lately, the largest chunk of my efforts result in mediocre sonata writing. 

BW,
Marijn

[ferago42]

Fair enough. I usually have in mind how many pieces and the overall structure, but yes, knowing how is it gonna be helps. I guess, I don't have that many compositions, yet.

[ted]

I never bother classifying anything; other people can do that if they feel so inclined, which is probably not the case. Sometimes I have given compositions and improvisations names meaningful to me, but I would far sooner a listener generate his or her own associations. I do assign a numerical sequence to recorded improvisations, but it doesn't mean a lot. Structure in any sense of the word is a waste of time for me. I live from musical moment to musical moment and just let all the ideas come out and hope for the best. But then I suppose I am an old fart with nothing to prove.

Labels assigned to things don't really matter, ferago42, just enjoy yourself and let the ideas flow.

[visitor]

I always thought you assign opus when you publish, not sure you call something op. If its not publushed


you could call short works preludes, interludes or intermezzo or postludes.  Or group small works and simply call them short pieces.  Or a suite etc.  You can start composing w a piece in mind but later re organize ideas or borroq a theme or change form around to call it something else. 
if you loosely follow a sonata form and single movent you cam call it a fantasy or a rhapsody if more open in structure etc

[109natsu]

I always thought you assign opus when you publish, not sure you call something op. If its not publushed

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=opus+definition

Yes, opus is usually used when it is published. So for example, Chopin's 10th publication would be his first set of the twelve etudes, which will all be Op.10

If you aren't publishing your works, I don't think it's appropriate to classify them with Opus.

Talking about whether you should classify your compositions, if you have many of them you should, but if you just have a few, it's not really meaningful in my opinion.
Let's say you composed ten pieces.

People in the future:
A: "So here is so and so's Opus 9 intermezzo"
B: "Wait he only wrote one intermezzo so can't you just say his Intermezzo?"
A: "I guess you could... but Opus 9??"

Okay, I should just go to bed because my mind is crazy.

---

Simple Answer: do whatever you want

Also keep in mind that Mozart, Bach, etc. are organized by stuff other than Opus.

[chopinlover01]

Also keep in mind that Mozart, Bach, etc. are organized by stuff other than Opus.

They didn't really organize their output at all. That's why we have the numbers: for Bach, it's the BWV (Bach-Werke-Verzeichnis, which translates to Bach work catalogue), for Mozart, it's the Köchel, named after Ludwig A.F. Ritter von Köchel. For Haydn it's the Hoboken, similar reasons.
From about Beethoven onwards, people got proper music publishers and kept things more organized. With certain exceptions.

(*cough* Schubert *cough*)

[109natsu]

They didn't really organize their output at all. That's why we have the numbers: for Bach, it's the BWV (Bach-Werke-Verzeichnis, which translates to Bach work catalogue), for Mozart, it's the Köchel, named after Ludwig A.F. Ritter von Köchel. For Haydn it's the Hoboken, similar reasons.
From about Beethoven onwards, people got proper music publishers and kept things more organized. With certain exceptions.

(*cough* Schubert *cough*)

Did you not expect me to know this? or what

Anyway, we musicians are really lazy after all, so if you become famous, let your publishers and researchers organize

[ferago42]

@ted yes well, I like to title and organize and categorize. It's probably just my thing.

@109natsu Yes, I know opus is for published work, and I intend to publish it actually. Anyway, the opus were just examples.


@all Thank you all for your input! Best wishes!