Jump to content
caters

Rondo a Capriccio Harmonic Analysis

Recommended Posts

So, I have finished analyzing Rondo a Capriccio. I found most of it simple to analyze. Those sequences that I got stuck on, I got stuck on because of the accented non-chord tones that Beethoven uses. But other than that, I found the analysis to be pretty simple to do. A lot of secondary dominants are used here. A lot of these are functional(so like the secondary tonic shows up right after the secondary dominant most of the time) but some are non-functional, only there as part of a sequence. Measure 57 is where a bit of ambiguity starts. I decided to analyze it in Bb until it made no more sense in Bb(which would be at measure 68) and then notate it as a pivot to Gm.

Here is my reasoning behind analysing bars 57-68 in Bb instead of Gm:

Quote

Yes, you would expect to hear Bb major chords in a G minor piece. But in a G minor piece, if there is a resolution to III, that typically is a modulation to Bb and thus is truly a resolution to I, not III. VI and VII on the other hand can be resolved to without a sense of modulation in a minor key, just like how in a major key, you can resolve to vi without actually modulating to vi. So it just makes more sense to me for bars 57-68 to be in Bb, regardless of whether that means there is a modulation later on or not. And besides, Rondo a Capriccio has frequent modulations anyway.

Also, typically, in a minor key, III does not get inverted whatsoever. It usually is in root position. Here, if the whole passage is analyzed as being in Gm, you get all 3 inversions. There are only 2 chords(3 if you extend it to seventh chords) that typically get all the inversions. Those being I and V in major and i and V in minor(and also vii°7 if you extend it to seventh chords). Other chords like IV or vi typically only get 2 of the 3 inversions and a few others like III typically aren't inverted at all. So to see all 3 inversions of what is supposedly III in Gm makes me doubt that it is in Gm at all and instead think that it is in Bb.

The short tonicizations I didn't bother notating as key changes and instead I decided to notate them as secondary dominants in the previous key. That is, except for some at the end where I'm not sure if it is a tonicization or a modulation, so I notated it as a modulation as a precautionary measure. A lot of the ending measures are simply I V I alternations with a lot of non-chord tones. Another frequent secondary chord I found is secondary diminished sevenths, usually vii°7/V leading either to V or to vii°7, which then leads to I or V depending on the previous chord. I saw a couple of augmented sixth chords, both German augmented sixths. The first one resolves to the dominant and is then respelt as a dominant seventh chord. The second one leads directly to a new tonic by keeping one of its notes as a common tone and resolving the other 3.

So here is my analysis of Rondo a Capriccio and an MP3 so that you can listen to the piece. Do you think my analysis is accurate? Anything you would change about it?

 

MP3
0:00
0:00
PDF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't take a look at it too close (the use of B-flat seems mostly fine, but the fact you have to mid-modulate is less than ideal). I mostly disagree with a lot of stuff starting at 107. Even though the chords might be ever-changing in the way you notate them, I highly doubt that the harmonic rhythm is actually moving that fast. Looking at it in a Schenkerian framework, there are a lot more diminutions than anything else especially in those runs (i.e. consonant skips w/filled in passing tones), each outlining one harmonic function than each of those actually meaning anything. Imagine, for example, analyzing every inversion in Alberti bass. The mid-level structure suffers the more you deviate from the implied prolongation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Monarcheon said:

I didn't take a look at it too close (the use of B-flat seems mostly fine, but the fact you have to mid-modulate is less than ideal). I mostly disagree with a lot of stuff starting at 107. Even though the chords might be ever-changing in the way you notate them, I highly doubt that the harmonic rhythm is actually moving that fast. Looking at it in a Schenkerian framework, there are a lot more diminutions than anything else especially in those runs (i.e. consonant skips w/filled in passing tones), each outlining one harmonic function than each of those actually meaning anything. Imagine, for example, analyzing every inversion in Alberti bass. The mid-level structure suffers the more you deviate from the implied prolongation. 

 

Well, I mean Rondo a Capriccio frequently modulates anyway, so I don't see the mid-section modulation in the area with a 2 flat key signature as much of a disadvantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...