Haydn's Haus

[lordlance]

Yes and the few symphonies with uncommon movements or movement orders (like the 6 movement "il distratto"#60 or #49 beginning with a slow movement or 3 movement ones like 26 or 30) still follow the same or very similar structures.
However, I don't think that this was meant with "form" above, but I am not sure what exactly was meant.

I... Form is structure, no? Why is there ambiguity here? (That's a real question BTW.) 

[Brian]

Copyright strikes are often automated; I've certainly heard of people (not DH) who have had videos removed even though they had permission or were, in fact, the performer.

Since No. 80 is my favorite symphony of all, I decided to listen to that video to see what kind of analysis DH offers. I stopped about 25% of the way through to get work done, but so far he has indeed taught me a few things. He has also only hummed once - to illustrate (vs. the real clip from Nimbus) that a melody is a surprising seven bars vs. the usual eight, and what it might sound like if it had been eight bars instead.

Listened to all of it. It was an interesting overview of how the piece works and how the parts come together. It also pointed out interesting precursors and successors: how the first movement derives from the Gluck "Dance of the Furies" originally from Don Juan's ballet music, which Haydn had staged at the palace, and how the scherzo's trio prefigures a similar repetitive oboe solo in the trio of Sibelius' Second.

I wouldn't exactly say it was the deepest most analytical study in history, but as a lover of 80 I learned from it, and in the era where booklet notes are going extinct, it is a great way for a newcomer to understand how the symphony succeeds. Plus, lots of recording excerpts. After it ended, I put on the Gluck Don Juan and had an urge to listen to Haydn, too. I would strongly consider listening to the other episodes in this series.

[Jo498]

I... Form is structure, no? Why is there ambiguity here? (That's a real question BTW.)

The ambiguity is that in one sense they almost all have the same form/forms. They are almost all in 3 or 4 movements and almost all movements are of a limited set of types of movement. So this "rough" assessment is not hard for someone familiar with Viennese classical music, it's even a "given", because if they departed too far from the standard form(s) they would not have been called symphonies (but divertimenti, concertos or ouvertures would still draw on the same or very similar forms):

The details would be of course quite a bit of work, because these forms are flexible enough for lots of potentially interesting details.

[lordlance]

The ambiguity is that in one sense they almost all have the same form/forms. They are almost all in 3 or 4 movements and almost all movements are of a limited set of types of movement. So this "rough" assessment is not hard for someone familiar with Viennese classical music, it's even a "given", because if they departed too far from the standard form(s) they would not have been called symphonies (but divertimenti, concertos or ouvertures would still draw on the same or very similar forms):

The details would be of course quite a bit of work, because these forms are flexible enough for lots of potentially interesting details.

Isn't that what Dave is doing? Basic structure is easy to understand even for novice. The videos are all 20-25 minutes so I'm assuming they're dissecting details.