Group 3

John Mowry Great choice! Looking forward to seeing your analysis of the exposition.

Ben Laude 

Ben, here is page one and a portion of the second page complete. I think I’m on the right track up to the cadence in m22. In m23 I believe the second theme begins and Mozart has modulated to the dominant, D major. I’m not sure about m25. Then from m27 to 31 he follows a similar scalar pattern, walking down in the bass. Again, I’m a little lost or unsure how to analyze m33 through most of the rest of this page. I see a recurring G# which makes me wonder if we again are modulating to A major but there are a lot of accidentals through this section. Look forward to your comments. Thanks.

John Mowry good work! Here's some comments to help you sharpen things:

• Bars 2-3: Your inversion symbols aren't quite right. 4/2 means 3rd inversion (think: there can only be a "2" above the bass if the 7th is in the bass, since it's a step away from the root).  So, bar 2 is in 2nd inversion (5th is in the bass) which is 4/3, and bar 3 is in first inversion (3rd in the bass) which is 6/5.
• Bars 5-6: It's worth circling the downbeat accented passing tones (appoggiaturas) F# in bar 5 and E in bar 6, since they're prominent non chord tones.
• Bar 7: What you write is correct (the final beat is a V6 though), but functionally, you could also just call the whole bar V7 and the middle beat passing tones (even though it spells a tonic). The I is in My reasoning is that if someone were to just hold a V7 chord while you played that bar, you'd hear that the whole bar has a dominant function to prepare for the arrival on the tonic in bar 8. Sometimes we get too zoomed in with a magnifying glass when we're labeling roman numerals that we forget the larger harmonic context, which is ultimately where the music is taking place.
• Bar 14: Note that the IV chord is in first inversion
• Bar 15: There's no obligation to mark a new harmony on the downbeat here, and if you were to mark anything, I can't be right. We don't have the tones of a tonic chord, and musically speaking, we're still within the grip of the IV6 chord (even though there's a rest). Bars 14-15 are a classic example of "hemiola", where you change the feel of the meter within the parameters of the existing meter. In this case, Mozart is treating all of bars 14-15 as a single bar of 3/2 meter (3 half notes to a bar. Do you hear/feel what I'm talking about?). The harmonies change on each half note pulse, so the downbeat of 15 is actually the "& of 2." On the third half note beat (2nd notated beat in bar 15) we have a cadential 6/4. What looks like an inverted I chord is actually a decorated V (functionally speaking, this is how our ears hear it, even though our eyes deceive us). You can actually just label that apparent I6/4 chord as a V chord with 6/4 above it, resolving to 7/5/3 in the last beat. We were talking about this with Eric Wen in the Zoom check-in last Friday, and you'll hear more about it in his Mozart lesson released to the library this Friday. 
• Bar 18: V is implied, yes, but since you don't get a full chord and the C is not operating as the 7th of a dominant 7th, I would only write "V." If anything, the final beat is implying a V7 of IV (hence the F-natural), but it's okay if you don't zoom in that far with roman numerals. It's another fleeting moment on a weak beat, so what matters here is that you've marking the pillar chords (as you do) and keeping track of the bass motion.
• Bar 19: Note that the F natural turns back into F-sharp, which underscores the temporary tonicization of C major 
• Bar 22: Nice work! Mozart has indeed modulated to D major (the dominant of our home key, as is expected in a classical sonata).
• Bars 23-24: Like in bar 7, it's both easier and more musical to just label each bar with a single roman numeral and don't worry too much about the fact that the inversion changes by the end of the bar. I6 and V6 are enough for 23-24 (in my view), and then you can indicate the passing motion through the non chord tones mid-bar.
• Bar 25-26: If you want to be literal, you'd call 25 a vi chord. But personally, I hear it as a return to I, but with an accented passing motion int he bass from B-C# before reaching the root of the chord, D, in beat 3. If you were to accompany a recording of this piece and just play I6 - V6 - I - V from bars 23-26, it would sound correct. And I think it's how we hear/feel it. Don't let the walking bass trip you up. Similarly, don't let the arpeggiated bass in 26 make you think that the 2nd inversion of the V chord matters all that much. I would just write V for bar 26. Since you do eventually reach the root A. It also helps justify the analysis in 25 as "I," since that was also determined only on the 3rd beat in the bass.
• Note that 27-30 is a decorated restatement of 23-26.
• From 31 to the end of the exposition, we're firmly in D. Not even a hint of A major, actually. Every time we get an A major chord, it sounds like a dominant, and usually features the G-natural, making it a full V7 in D.
• So what about the G#s? Leaving aside 33-34 (and 38-39), which is a funky cool moment harmonically, but otherwise just passing between I and V, the other G3s in 35, 36, 40, and 41 shouldn't trouble you at all. They are merely chromatic lower neighbors a half step below A, that serve to reinforce the A dominant 7th chord that is being outlines. True, they're on strong pulses, but that just makes them "accented" neighbor tones, and is what gives them their flavor and bounce.
• Want to try to the end of the exposition, and start adding structural markers? You noted the second theme. You can also mark cadences: half cadences (pauses on V when you're in G or D), and authentic cadences (structural V-I moments in either G or D). Doing this will help you structure your interpretation, and know what to aim for!

Ben Laude 

‘Thank you for your very helpful comments Ben; particularly those related to bars 15-16.

I’ve continued through the exposition, attempting to add phrasing and cadences as suggested. I look forward to the wrap up video and want to thank you, Nicole and Eric. Very interesting and quite instructive to read through comments related to other people’s works.

Midori Great choice and I'm looking forward to what you do with your analysis!

Ben Laude 

Hi Ben,

here is the beginning of my analysis. I want to go beyond the Roman numerals and really want to understand what each chord does in terms of the functions and the emotions it conveys. Why do you think I-IV is so nostalgic sounding? I am not yet sure, although I get that feeling every single time in many other pieces too. I also wonder why Schubert decided to mention the tonic rather briefly. He does use dominant 7th to tonic but rather as a way to another destination (Eflat). I’m looking forward to analyzing more. 

Midori I'll jump in since I'm finally done with an intense violin studio rehearsal/recital commitment (which kept me away from here longer than I would have liked).

I love your comment that I-IV sounds nostalgic. This is talked about a lot in Brahms. Basically, it's a plagal, or almost a "backwards" progression--well, V-IV would be a truly "backwards" progression. They call these retrogressions. Brahms was really famous for these because he'd studied pre-tonal music intensely (like Renaissance) and that type of music isn't so directional in the chord strings it uses. My old IU colleague Diego Cubero wrote his theory dissertation about the "autumnal" idea in Brahms and backed it up with Schenkerian analyses if really high-level stuff is your interest. I don't know if he published it but ProQuest might dig it up for you. Or if you contact him I'm sure he's happy to hook you up.

OK--now the Schubert! Great piece for analysis--it comes up in theory discussions absolutely all the time.

Measures 3-4, I would simply call that a I6 chord with the Fs being treated as 4-3 suspensions. Almost like how cadential 6/4s work--they look like a different chord due to the number of suspensions in them.

I see you also noted you feel like there's been a modulation to Eb at the end of the phrase--yes, definitely tonicized with the borrowed dominant, and that whole schema starting at m. 5 beat 3 is a modulating Prinner (here's Bob Gjerdingen's quick and dirty schema outline PDF: https://partimenti.org/schemas/collections/galant/schema_prototypes.pdf ). Personally, I'm not sure if I feel this is a "crashing on Eb's couch" or "Ab brought a suitcase" as I referred to it in the Zoom chat. Maybe "Eb was supposed to crash on the couch and it turned into staying for a week"? Sometimes the line between a tonicization and a modulation is blurry, and just because we call the schema a modulating Prinner doesn't mean it actually modulates. Both the Goldberg Variations and the Liszt Hungarian Rhapsody no. 6 open with modulating Prinners but we don't feel modulations happening in those phrases.

At any rate, I hope this gives you some things to chew on!

Nicole 

Thank you Nicole! I'd love to know more about this idea of "backwards" progression. How is I-IV similar to V-IV? The connection is not very clear to me but I'm very intrigued! By the way, what's the secret of making V-IV work? I remember from my theory class V-IV as something to be avoided (and sure enough when I try to use it it does not sound good). I am aware though when skillfully used, it's emotionally powerful, like the message is reenforced and emphasized. 

Nicole Also would love to read this dissertation! Thank you.

Midori I'm not sure I could distill "how to make V-IV work" in a comment post--I actually took a whole graduate seminar (1 semester long) on Brahms' harmony at IU! Basically it boils down to what's happening in the horizontal lines rather than in vertical successions, which I know is probably not super helpful for a somewhat introductory analysis intensive. If the linear stuff works there's more you can get away with harmonically.

Basically, IV is as far below the tonic (let's say F being located below C) as V is above it (so G if we are starting at C), so it feels like a bit of an "opposite" or "underworld" almost. There are some really wacky 19th-century writings on these "under"-progressions and even a whole "undertone series" (which people didn't really buy but it's a fun thought experiment).

You can grab Diego's dissertation here if you like: https://www.proquest.com/openview/bab94ae75a7ed1402e9939e4a57dcbf4/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

karin Why don't you start with the Liszt? Start by analyzing the first 25 bars (up to the 'quasi cadenza'). He does a very Lisztian chromatic move in this passage that I think would be good for you to study.

Let's keep the Haydn in our back pocket, and if we have a chance we can take a look at the exposition. It would be useful to compare the chromaticism of a minor classical piece to that of a romantic piece.

Ben Laude 

Ben Laude Hi Ben,

Here is my analysis of the first 24measures. Kindly take a look and comment. Thanks so much!

karin Mostly, this looks quite good!
I agree with your hesitation in m. 1 about labeling a new chord halfway through the measure. I don't think that's necessary except at points where a new note appears in the bass register, like in m. 8. I wouldn't even put two RNs in places like m. 5. It's all a dominant. In places like m. 13 you can also just change the figures if the inversion changes--like 6 to 5/3. 

Measures 13-20 are super interesting--they're a sequence, so we have lost the sense of harmonic function and it's a linear progression at that point (Linear Intervallic Progression, or LIP). At 13 possibly, or 15 for sure, I'd dispense with the Roman numerals, especially the attempts to modulate, and just outline the intervals being articulated between bass and soprano. Here they'd be--if I ignore the arpeggiated accompaniment--10, 5, 10. then 10,5,10 again. And so on. It's an ascending 3rds progression (actually major 3rds each time so it's chromatic). Almost a distant descendant of the Folia progression as it's known in schema theory. At m. 20 we're clearly finding the dominant again (as you noted) so you can stop there.

Nicole Thank you for teaching and helping me. I learned harmonic analysis at school but don't feel confident doing it. You left me interesting ideas to think about and to discover more.  Your comments are very much appreciated!!

Harriet Kaplan That's exciting! It will be cool to see how you approach a piano piece like this, coming from a serious cello background. Chopin Mazurkas are perfect little pieces to analyze - harmonically and rhythmically adventurous. This one in particular is pretty fascinating. I want to make sure you get some feedback from Eric Wen, because especially with the radical chromaticism of the first 4 bars, I think his perspective will be very useful.

By the way, you should go watch the Arie Vardi tonebase lesson on Chopin's poly-melody/polyphony. Somewhere in there he explores this very Mazurka. Although not a theory lesson, it would be a nice complement to what we're doing.

rebecca LAM Great. If you're brand new to analysis, let's just start with the first 4 bars (up until the scales). Plenty to discuss there, and I'd rather you dig into to shorter sections than try to skim across the surface of the piece.

Ben Laude 

rebecca LAM Not bad! Let me help you think through a couple of harmonies, and then you can move forward:

• If this were a ii chord, you'd wouldn't see a G in a prominent position above the D, since G is not part of the ii chord (DFA). You also don't get an A.
• So, whatever the chord is, it must not have its root note – the note that identifies the chord - in the bass.
• So, take all the notes you see there, except the two quick 16th notes (which are in a weak metrical position, and are merely decoration), and I want you to stack the notes up to build a chord. The notes need to be stacked a third apart (right now, you see there's a 2nd between the F and G). What note would you need to start on to stack the notes in a chord? (Remember, you can move notes to different octaves). Is it a 3 note triad or a 4 note seventh chord? Once you do this, you'll see what note is at the root of the chord, which is how you'll label it.

(Let me know if that makes sense.)

In general, know that music – especially from this classical period – likes to move between "tonic" and "dominant" (I and V). You can see this also in bar 4.

• By the way, the harmony in bar 4, here:

• could actually be thought of as more than just G major. That F could be considered part of the chord.
• Compare this to bar 2. What do you notice?

Also, this chord:

• you labeled the roman numeral correctly. But, C can't be the root. The fourth scale degree is F, so this is an F major triad. Since C is the lowest note, this must be some inversion of the FAC root position triad.
• Do you think this is 1st or 2nd inversion?

Another thing: you don't need to write roman numeral I multiple times in bar I. It's the tonic chord the whole bar. And it's actually useful to just write it once, and then draw a horizontal line to the right until the harmony changes again:

I --------

This helps emphasize the prolongation of that harmony, and it helps you see the "harmonic rhythm" of the phrase: the rate at which harmonies change.

Now I want you to do your best trying to comprehend bars 5-12. Do not worry about all the notes in the scales. Look at structural notes that occur on beats. For example, bar 5 starts with F in the bass and an A in the right hand. What chord/roman numeral starts with F-A when you're in C major?

Ben Laude