This chapter discusses iconizing practices in the small and distinguishable discourse of music theory. Beyond the terminological differences between the terms ‘type’, ‘topos’, ‘model’ or ‘icon’, the inextricable interaction of contrapuntal and harmonic principles is one of the decisive insights into tonal music in current musicological discourse. Dahlhaus’s research on types and formulas (1968) allowed an understanding of musical structures beyond dogmatic systematics: Progressions of the interval movement remained relevant for the history of composition. Their identification makes it possible to determine recurring structures beyond established theories of harmony. Johannes Brahms is undisputed for his historical obsession with counterpoint, which is often strongly ideologically charged in his work. Brahms’ preoccupation with contrapuntal studies touches both his early and late works. The composer’s interventions in the slow movement of his Clarinet Quintet in B minor op. 115 are comparable. In this context, the frequently expressed assessment that counterpoint plays a subordinate role in Brahms’ quintet also seems surprising. On the basis of the staging of counterpoint in Brahms in various contexts, a work-centred approach is to be presented and transferred into an interdisciplinary context: Intertextual methods of analysis have become common in the development of music—but the question is to what extent and with regard to which community or milieu a compositional technique can also assume the role of a cultural icon.