14007299

MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

14007299

MUS-20044

Theory and Analysis

Dr Alastair Williams

1
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

Explain the principles of voice-leading (Schenkerian) analysis, with

direct reference to Chorale no.217, Ach Gott, Wie manches Herzeleid,
indicating what the symbols mean. What in your view are the strengths
and weaknesses of voice-leading analysis?

Schenkerian analysis is a method used widely by music analysts to

explore various pieces of music to analyse their underlying harmonic,
melodic and rhythmic structure. So Schenkerian analysis is a sound way
to simplify the pitches within each bar.

(Fig1.1)
If we take a look at the first phrase of the chorale, we see that bar 1 is
entirely within C major, the tonic. We then move to the subdominant for
bar 2 to allow a smooth progression to the supertonic for an imperfect
cadence in bar 4. Then, looking at the analysis itself, we notice that this
simple chord progression is very simply shown through Schenkerian
methods:

(Fig1.2) As we can see in the analysis of the

first phrase, we have a development around C major. We also see that
other notes are present; these indicate the notes within the chorale, but

2
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

still on the chord and so gives the shape of the phrase. Since the chorale
is in C, then I is the initial chord to indicate the tonic.
The bottom line of Schenker analysis is used to show a very simplified
version of the chords and thus how the piece rises and falls between the
tonic and the dominant. This bottom line is also referred to as the
foreground.

As well as the foreground, this form of analysis has what is known as a

middle ground. The middle ground contains the progressions of the
chords throughout the music:

(Fig1.3) This is the middle ground for the chorale. One can clearly see
how the chords progress throughout. Also note that the chordal
progression is clearly represented here and so very easy to interpret.
Note that this is a reduction of complex harmony into simple symbols
the whole purpose of Schenker analysis.

We move further into the chorale, where one observes a prolongation on

the dominant key, G major. (Fig1.4) The

analysis here clearly shows that this phrase is based around G.
However, we also see the various notes showing a melodic ascent within
the phrase. The numbers which one sees within this figure, and
throughout the analysis indicate the figuring of the chord.

3
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

One notices even more content within the chorale.

(Fig1.5)
Within this figure, we have a line leading directly from the bass C to
treble E. This line indicates the fundamental line of the music, how the
music itself moves in tandem with the harmonic progressions. So this
line indicates which way the harmony moves as the chorale goes on.

(Fig1.6) Furthermore, how does one tell that this is the

fundamental line? Observe in Fig1.6, this is the final note of the line
drawn in the analysis. We note that this is the mediant of C, which
explains the 3 above E. Though the 3 has a hatWe call the hat a carat
and this is the ending note of the fundamental line.

Towards the end of the chorale, there is a multitude of chord

progressions and notes which make for some interesting harmonic
progressions. So ordinarily, one would represent this using figured bass
under the scored bassline; but with Schenker analysis, we have the
means to represent these changes with ease.

(Fig1.7)
In fig1.7, we can see just how these chordal progressions are represented
within the middle ground, creating rather pleasing sounding harmonies

4
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

which one would not necessarily expect to hear. Needless to say, the
analysis here greatly simplifies the harmonic structure of the chorale,
indicating very little change in rhythm typical of Bach chorales, they
are not the most rhythmically exciting pieces, but do possess radiant
harmonies.

In my opinion, Schenkerian analysis has many more strengths than

weaknesses. At a first glance it is somewhat confusing to understand,
but once understood, is a truly beautiful form of analysis for one to read.

When using Schenker analysis on a piece, we break it down to its core,

which in itself is remarkably intriguing. We get to see what the great
composers were doing with their masterpieces and what makes the
piece such an intelligent work. Chords are clearly shown, so one can
follow exactly what shape the piece will take harmonically and
melodically. This helps us to see how the harmony works in unity with
the melody throughout. I would highly recommend using Schenker
analysis to find out what essentially makes a piece tick. We find the
way in which voices are used to achieve melodic and harmonic aims.

A great advantage of Schenker analysis is how much information we can

represent in just one diagram. Yes, there are a collection of symbols, but
each serves a decent purpose. For instance, we can instantly see the
harmonic shape of the piece, or where the fundamental line begins and
ends. We see chordal progressions easily, alongside the notes which
show the progression. Also we can see the prolongation on various
notes within the home key.

It is quite easy to see why some musicians find many weaknesses within
Schenker analysis. Firstly, to look at a Schenker analysis for the first
time, it does not appeal. Much confusion can easily be created, and quite
easily. There are many symbols all over the place, which, without
knowledge of what they are, is understandably daunting. On the surface
we find that Schenker analysis is very convoluted and inaccessible to
different musicians and readers of music alike.

5
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

All the things which I have previously mentioned so far during this
essay, are all things which I had to sit down and learn. As a musician
with a vast knowledge of music theory, I found this a challenge at first.
However, if you look at the benefits of being able to read a Schenker
analysis, or even perform one on a piece of music, you can reap the
rewards. A piece can be taken apart and stripped down to its
fundamentals, which is crucial to be able to analyse a piece.

Overall, I would argue Schenkerian analysis has far more strengths than
weaknesses, as explained above. I would highly recommend it to any
musician for analysing a piece of music.

Explain the analysis of the first movement of Beethovens Piano Sonata

in F minor, Op. 2, No. 1.

Beethoven is undoubtedly one of the finest composers of all time. We

have seen countless compositions from the man who could still hear
melodies even when deaf nothing short of remarkable. So it is not
surprising that we can look at an analyse Beethovens music in great
depth, as William Caplin did.

Caplin begins his analysis of the piano sonata by explaining how

Beethoven establishes the home key of the piece within the presentation
phrase.

(Fig2.1)
Fig2.1 is taken directly from Caplins analysis. It shows how Beethoven
exposes the F minor home key to us, by playing single notes in a
diatonic ascension up until mediant an octave above. From this we then
have a repetition of this presentation phrase, but on the dominant this

6
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

time. We are exposed to this initial idea twice, with great effect.
Repeating the phrase on the dominant allowed Beethoven to use a
continuation which includes fragments of the initial presentation.

This section of the sonata which contains fig2.1 has beautiful symmetric
phrasing. We have two, four-bar phrases which join together as a perfect
puzzle, revealing all to the analyst. Caplin claims that the main theme
of this exposition is a model sentence form (Caplin W, Analzying
Classical Form, OUP USA, 2013). On observation, yes the section does
match the ideal sentence form, having the two four-bar phrases.

Upon looking at the next section in Caplins article, we see the transition.
A transition would be present in a piece to destabilize the home key,
allowing another key to become the tonal opposition. In Caplins
example 9.2, we see the restating of the main theme, but lower in pitch
and on the dominant. This is destabilizing the home key of the piece.

(Fig2.2)
We see in this figure that the main theme has been repeated, but in the
key of C minor, the dominant. Unlike the repetition of the basic idea in
the presentation phrase, this section carries on with 4 bars of music
which act as a continuation function. Beethoven finally starts to build
upon this basic idea, as using a continuation allows him to work into
more complex ideas.

Moreover, when one looks at bars 16-18, we observe that Beethoven is

very much standing on the dominant, as Caplin puts it. What does
Caplin mean by this? When we look, in bars 16-18, Beethoven is working
around Eb, which is a whole 7th up from F. So Caplin infers that
Beethoven has modulated to the relative major, Ab, and is playing on
the dominant, which makes sense as this is Eb.

7
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

Just before this standing on the dominant, notice that we have a

cadence on the first beat of the bar. This is an imperfect cadence though,
so one cannot be surprised to hear a new phrase beginning on the
dominant. So this is what Caplin is referring to when he mentions that
the cadential arrival in bar-16 is obscured by the repetition of the half
cadence gesture. This is true due to reasons I have mentioned above,
but that is the purpose of an imperfect cadence. Beethoven evidently
wished to continue his phrases and so we have the appearance of the
half cadence.

When one progresses further into the article, we find ourselves at

example 9.3. Here Caplin is analysing Beethovens subordinate theme,
alongside the extended cadential passages, concluding with the perfect
authentic cadence.

We begin the section with a presentation of the subordinate theme.

Caplin goes on to explain that the function of a subordinate theme is to
confirm fully the subordinate key. So the subordinate theme provides
us with the evidence we need to say that yes, we definitively know
which key the section is in. As the theme is used for confirmation, the
theme itself much end with a perfect authentic cadence in the new key.

This subordinate theme brings about a new idea into the piece. This new
idea is also simple, just like the basic idea within the presentation
phrase. The theme usually displays contrasting material to the main
theme, which we do. Whilst this new theme descends, and is repeated
identically, the original basic idea ascended diatonically and was then
repeated at a different pitch.

One is then exposed to extended cadential progressions which descend

in a legato fashion, providing audible intrigue. As Caplin puts it, the
anticipated cadence is first evaded in measure 37. So we have these
descending scale passages which do not go where one would initially
expect.

8
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

Furthermore, we come to example 9.5. Here Caplin exposes us to the

development section. With this, we are informed that Beethoven
presents his initial basic idea in the subordinate key, although it has
been extended this time with the addition of one extra measure the
idea is evidently being developed.

(Fig2.3)
Here, we can clearly see that the subordinate theme has made another
appearance, but this time it is a model presentation but at a pitch one
tone above development. This is then aided by a continuation which
leads to another representation of the subordinate theme, however it is
another tone higher in this instance. Following this, we observe some
fragmentation with sequences.

Moving to example 9.9, we find ourselves at the recapitulation section of

the sonata. We have the main idea presented to us right away,
structurally unchanged. Caplin speaks of how the presentation of the
original basic idea begins to solidify the idea that the piece will remain
in the home key. Audibly, one would have to agree. Once we hear a
particular key, it is much more pleasing on the ears if the music stays in
that key.

Example 9.10 is very much similar to 9.9, except we have the

subordinate theme exposed again, but at two different pitches.

The final example, 9.11, we are introduced to a second subordinate

theme. This also acts (according to Caplin) as a false closing section.
One can see where Caplin gains this idea from as the cadences do finish
perfectly in the home key, but then this cadence is obscured (like before)
and there is a continuation to the final three measures of cadences which

9
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

conclude perfectly with an F minor chord. Caplin believes that this final
section begins to look like that of the exposition. He then furthers this
by saying the difference is Beethovens use of the German augmented-
sixth for the pre-dominant harmony.

Ultimately, Caplins article and analysis of this first section of

Beethovens sonata is sublime. No detail is missed. Everything he
mentions has an exact purpose and reason for being in his article.

Provide a critical evaluation of pitch-class set theory. Then explain the

set-theoretical analysis of Schoenberg, Op.19, No.6.

Pitch class set theory is a term which is somewhat terrifying to many

musicians, as it involves the wonderful subject of mathematics. As a
mathematician myself, I find this topic incredibly interesting how we
can apply the mathematics of Set Theory to that of musical intervals
remarkable!

Firstly, a pitch class is defined as A category of notes including all

possible octaves and enharmonic spellings of a particular pitch. There
are only 12 pitch classes(Defn1.1) (learnmusictheory.net). So we can
place different pitches on a scale into a set, which is a mathematical
object.

If we were to take the C major chromatic scale, we number each note,

from 0 to 11, with C = 0, and B = 11. However, sometimes 10 = T and 11 =
E. We must then remember that as there are only 12 pitch classes within
a set, we must remember that our calculations rely on modular
arithmetic we work under modulo 12.

(Fig3.1)
If we look at fig3.1, this is how one should set out the scale ideally before
performing any calculations to simplify the work. So far so good, we

10
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

must remember our modular arithmetic and then there is little room for
error. One would argue that this is rather simply so far.

Next I look at what happens under transposition. We can write an

equation: " = + (mod12) (Eq1.1). Let x denote the number of the
note which we begin with, then n denotes the number of semitones by
which we move this note. So this is the equation for transposition. For
example, if we were in the key of D major, and x was A, then x = 7. If we
were to transpose this up by 3 semitones, then, using the equation for
transposition:
' = 7 + 3(12) = 10. This would then mean that we have x as C
after the transposition has been applied.

Again, this relies a huge amount on mathematics, and relies on the fact
that the musician is comfortable performing these operations.

We can also invert pitch classes. As this simply means we need to

oppose the interval perfectly symmetrical from the note of interest. For
instance, if we wanted to invert E about C, the inversion would be A as
this is the same interval from C, but essentially reflected in C. Another
way to see this, is let x be the number of the note in the pitch class set,
then the inversion I(x)=12-x (Eq1.2). A fairly simple piece of mathematics
is required for inverting, just like transposing.

Also, every pitch class set can be fully inverted; this requires more
thought and two mathematical operations. Without dwelling too much
on the subject, one simply inverts each pitch class, and then transposes
by the required amount.

Before moving on, we must consider two more definitions.

Normal Order: A standard format for listing pitch class sets; normal order is
useful for comparing sets.(Defn1.2) (learnmusictheory.net).
Prime Form: the best normal order as pitch class numbers transposed to start
on C. Since C=0, prime form reveals the number of half steps each pitch class is
above the first one. Prime form provides an easy shorthand for comparing the

11
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

interval structure of sets throughout a piece of music.(Defn1.3)

(learnmusictheory.net).

We now look at Nicholas Cooks set theoretical analysis of one of

Schoenbergs little piano pieces, Op.19, No.6.

Cook begins his analysis by explaining that for atonal music, we cannot
use the tools which we are provided with when using Schenkerian
analysis we must use another form of analysis.

So we look at the numerical relationship between the notes within the

pitch class set, and then we can apply set theory to these sets and find
various relationships for analysis purposes.

Cook divides Schoenbergs piece into 6 different sections, labelling them

A E. We are told to treat each section as an individual harmonic unit.
From there Cook calculates each pitch class set for the different sections
of the piece.

We know that A={0,5,6,7,9,E}, so each number with A is referred to as an

element of A when it comes to set theory. So Cook writes out the sets
using the stave. Then he begins to talk about the different relationships
between each pitch class set. Cook tells us that E and D are related since
every element in D is also in E. So in set notation we say that we have
the union of E and D, which is written as EUD, where U is
representative of the union itself.

Other sets may not directly relate to each other, as Cook tells us. Some
sets may need to undergo either a transposition or inversion to become
related to another set. For example, he tells us that B and D are related
through transposition as B is a transposition of D. However, some sets
may only be related under two separate operations. We see this in the
analysis:

12
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

(Fig3.2)
From this we see that B must be transposed, and then take the
compliment of this transposed set to attain the complimentative relation
between B and F.

So there is more mathematics involved when we get to the actual set

theory which we require to show relations.

In conclusion, pitch class set theory is a superb way to analyse music. It

may not necessarily be most musicians first choice of methods, but for
atonal music it works a treat. In my own experience, I find that most
musicians dont like this method since it is confusing, but they were not
mathematicians, and so more practice would be required in set theory.
That is, of course, is not to say that non-mathematical musicians do not
use/prefer this method. This method is not as easily accessible as others
for analytical purposes, but does easily give answers to pondering
questions about atonal music.

13
14007299 MUS-20044 Theory and Analysis

Bibliography

Bach, J. S. Ach Gott, Wie Manches Herzeleid. Digital image.

Students.keele.ac.uk. Dr Alastair Williams, Web.
<https://students.keele.ac.uk/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.js
p?course_id=_337243_1&content_id=_1158504_1>.

Bach, J. S. Ach Gott, Diagram. Digital image. Students.keele.ac.uk. Dr

Alastair Williams, Web. <https://students.keele.ac.uk/bbcswebdav/pid-
1158503-dt-content-rid-2571968_1/courses/MUS-20044-2016-SEM1-
A/Ach%20Gott%2C%20diagram.pdf>.

Caplin, William Earl. Analyzing Classical Form: An Approach for the

Classroom. New York: Oxford UP, 2013. Print.

Feezell, Mark. "Pitch Class Sets." Music Theory at

LearnMusicTheory.net. Web. 02 Jan. 2017.
<http://www.learnmusictheory.net/>.

Cook, Nicholas. "Set-theoretical Analysis." A Guide to Musical Analysis.

New York: G. Braziller, 1987. 124-37. Print.

14