This chapter analyses in close detail a cross-section of Hindemith's early music in order to demonstrate the presence of two pitch strategies. The first relates to his use of quartal pitch collections, which have been defined in the previous chapter. They arguably stem from Hindemith's expert familiarity with string instruments, as the open strings on a violin, viola, ’cello or double bass all form the quartal tetrachord 4-23. This collection was to be subsequently formalised in the Unterweisung as Series 1 and 2, and became a hierarchical basis for chord roots, chord formation and an analytical method. The second pitch strategy examined in this chapter relates to collections with higher cardinal values, such as the octatonic scale (8-23) which provide a more general sense of chromaticism. A dual practice of quartal and high-cardinality collections is evident in Hindemith's early music, while after the Unterweisung he shows a clear preference for the first strategy, based on ascending fourths, at the expense of octatonic collections. These two strategies cannot coexist; it is impossible to create a quartal tetrachord within the octatonic scale.

Hindemith's early music, defined here until 1922, self-consciously swings from seriousness to the grotesque, borrowing from styles such as expressionism, impressionism and jazz; baroque and classical forms; and dances such as shimmies and foxtrots. Perhaps as a result of this pluralism, it has proven to be exceptionally hard to analyse. This is also a consequence of the complexity of some of his music, particularly in terms of pitch structure, and the formidable wealth of motivic material. And yet, an analytical understanding of this music is required to discriminate between those elements of Hindemith's style that were jettisoned after the Unterweisung, including the octatonic scale, and those that remained consistent, such as quartal pitch collections. It helps us to construct a musical backdrop against which Hindemith first began formulating his theory of music. Provocatively, among the works of this period, several elements can be considered within the broad definition of early twentieth-century atonality. There are furthermore several instances of polytonality. Both atonality and polytonality were subsequently rejected in Unterweisung theory, leading to two possible conclusions: (1) that Hindemith was keen to distance himself from his early works, or (2) that he was keen to distance himself from compositional techniques which had offended the agenda of the Third Reich.