Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum Binary Form: Study and Analysis

C natural means key sig has reverted to one sharp (G major or E minor). The D# means E minor.

D# would only mean E major if G were also sharped.

Don't let your head spin, ask questions or skip over it.

I understand that what's being analyzed is number 4, in D major. I just went through it. This is much more complicated than anything I touched when learning about binary form. It is also not that easy to sight read, esp. the tenth in m. 22.

This is how I looked at it and what I saw:

- The first part up to the repeat is shorter than the second part. It's 19 measures long, while the second part is 27 measures, so more is going on.
- The start of the 2nd part does not seem like a modulated version of the first part when I play the first few measures.
- If I go to the very end, which is the next place I want to look, the last measure "looks like" the last measure of part 1. I mean that you have the same half note, same 16th to slurred 8th-quarter etc., and the intervals are the same. I expected to hear the same thing in a modulation, and I did.
- Working backward from the end of both parts, they have the same pattern for 7 measures. If you play m. 12 - 19, and play m. 40 - 47, you have exactly the same music, but in a different key.
- The first half ends in A major: modulating to the dominant key is common for this form. The second half ends in D major, which is the tonic. This is also common. We will also see this kind of thing in sonata form, where a certain part is modulated, and then revisited the second time in the original key.
- I don't seem to see the whole of the first part being repeated at the end; only the second half.

So at this point my impression is that Part I has its two halves, ending in the dominant key. Part II seems to go off and do its own thing, modulating through various keys. Then there is a break in the music in m. 35 via the rest in the RH, then 4 measures that bring the music back to the home key: 38 & 39 have a strong A7-D, and then we're repeating the last part of Part I, in D major.

This reminds me of a primitive version of sonata form. In sonata form the composer first sets out a couple of themes. Then there is a "development" where he plays with parts of the themes, going hog wild. The he "recapitulates" or goes back to how it started, ending in the same way as his beginning, but in the home key. I see a simple version of that here.

He also obscures his chords, making them subtle by extending notes, overlapping them (I am deliberately not using official terms), which makes it harder to follow for analysis. He also does counterpoint, where you hear a type of "melody" in one hand, and then it is taken up by the other hand, and maybe varied or put upside down. All of this makes the piece more difficult to analyze.

Notice that I am NOT starting at the beginning and working my way to the end. I am also not limiting myself to the first half. It seems handier to first get a general impression. It's like if you are from another planet and want to understand "human being" you don't start at the eyelashes, pupil, nostrils. You get an overview of the human form: head, torso, limbs, and then look at details which will have a sense as part of the whole. At least that is how I function.

Oddly enough I was considering e minor. It almost met all of my criteria. Now that I am calculating the E minor scale correctly (harmonic,) it is indeed meeting ALL criteria.

Could it be G Major | E Minor | G Major | D Major ?

We are only in second G Major occurrence for brief few bars and also the G# cancels itself. So perhaps just

G Major | E Minor | D Major ?

If this is generally in right direction, I will need to listen now to try and identify where shift takes place.

That's a relief. I will target an all monther. Trouble is, we still have 5 more to go. So that has me covered till the new year. Quite liking this one though. So will give it priority if I happen to need to squeeze in some Christmas shopping.



Thanks Keystring, this is just a brief excerpt of your thorough analysis and good to know I am on track with ending back on D Major. Thanks for this overview summary. I'm still digesting as I learn more of this piece.

Richard, I am baffled by your instructions about learning these preludes. They presuppose that the only useful learning or playing is by memorization. That's not helpful advice if someone wants to be able to play through the prelude to listen to how it sounds, sooner than a full-blown memorization effort can yield results.

It would be good if you wrote in measure numbers in your score. I see Cnat and D# occurring in measure 25.

There are various decorative things that can be done to the notes of a melody. in m. 25 the melody note is E, but there is a graceful dip to D# and back to E. It also allows the composer to create a rhythm. This is known as a "lower neighbour" but names are not important. That D# is not part of the harmony.

You can also have notes that extend past the harmony from the previous chord so that you have this feeling of resolving tension. Often the "appoggiatura" which means "leaning" works this way. Or you can have a note belonging to the next chord coming in prematurely, called "anticipation".

All of these devices are used here, so you will have notes in a beat that don't belong to the chord for a number of reasons.

I apologise for my inability to keep up with everybody. All the posts are coming too fast for me and I'm not able to keep track.

There are more people trying to follow these threads than there are people participating. There have been fifteen thousand views of the Moonlight thread since we finished it two weeks ago. The Bach Prelude thread has attracted over six thousand views since we last posted in it. Other threads have shown that these analyses are hard to follow. Let's acknowledge what we've started and try to keep it simple.

For participants and followers alike, please stop and ask if there's something you don't understand. We all have varied backgrounds and knowledge sets. It's really easy to assume knowledge or even to mis-type a post and cause confusion (in these threads there hasn't always been sufficient time to proof-read anything). If you stop us and ask questions we can clarify everything for everyone's benefit - often our own as well!
In music theory, there's never any harm in repeating the basics.

I posted this towards the end of the E minor Prelude thread:

I should have repeated that at the start of this thread.

I did not suggest an analysis of these pieces; group analysis is hard enough, as I'm learning, without starting with Bach, but if you wish to analyse them in detail, please fire away.

I suggested in the OP that you make a diagram of the key scheme. If finding keys is something you can do, make a diagram of the other five preludes.

You may prefer to just do one of them. The one I want to look at the most is the number 4. I think a major key prelude (1,4,5) would be easier than a minor key prelude (2,3,6).

If you've not made a key scheme diagram before, start with the first prelude and see if it agrees with mine. If it does, try the number four. If it doesn't, tell us where you disagree and we'll have a closer look.

All I want to do right now is look at key schemes.

What I hope to carry away at the end of this thread is the knowledge that a piece in binary form starts in tonic and moves to dominant at the first repeat bar (or relative major for a minor key piece) and that it finishes in tonic (or tonic major) at the end of the second half. We can discuss later in the thread how it came about that we move to the sharped keys and the dominant first and move to the flattened keys and subdominant later.

Of these six preludes only one, the number 4 in D major, repeats in tonic at the end of the second half a significant portion (8 bars) heard in the first half in the dominant key. We will see this more frequently in Scarlatti's sonatas. It was Scarlatti's works, more than Bach's, that foreshadowed sonata form. Sonata form is a key scheme rather than an architectural form. It's the keys that I want to look at. I personally don't want to start analysing pieces in detail until we get back to music we can play more readily (e.g. Clementi's Sonatina Op. 36 No. 1). But I don't want to stand in your way if that's your aim.
_________________________


As far as learning these pieces is concerned my "instructions" were targeted specifically at Jeff who is new to reading. He comes from a play by ear background. I should have prefixed my post more clearly. They were not intended as instructions but as an example to show that learning Bach is typically difficult and slow. What I posted, by way of an example, is my approach to Bach.

The ABRSM classifies this piece as grade 5 (harder than many of the inventions). I'd expect to be grade 6 or 7 before being able to render this prelude at sight.

I know many of you will be chomping at the bit to analyse the chords, rhythms and lyric without delay, and you're welcome to go ahead with this, but it isn't where I'm looking just yet (though I did learn the words first ).
__________________________

Looking at the D major prelude and thinking out loud:-

The first thing I look at is the repeat bars. One at the end and one in the "middle". That tells me it's binary form and that I can expect the first "half" to end in the dominant key, A, and the second half to end in the tonic, D.

D major is two sharps, F# and C#. A major is three sharps, F#, C# and G#, so I expect to see some accidental G#'s in the last few measures of the first half. A quick look confirms that this is the case.

Now I look at the last few bars in the second half to check that there are no accidentals and we're back in tonic. There's a D# in M41 and a 'courtesy' C# in M42 in line with the key signature. There are no more accidentals to M48 so I'm sure we're in tonic.

Next I look to see how many measures repeat at the end what I first heard in dominant in the first half. I count eight measures that 'rhyme'.

Finally I run my eye over the accidentals in the piece and get an idea of how many keys I'm likely to be running through and, when I've recovered from the number, I'll look more closely and see which keys they are. I'm expecting more at the start of the second half than anywhere else and I expect to pass through the subdominant, G major, before the final return to tonic.

I notice some G#'s in M5-7 but they're cancelled in M9 (i.e. by the end of the phrase) so I ignore them.

The first half is ||: D major : A major :||

There are some courtesy G naturals in M21-22 so we're back in tonic then.

C naturals start appearing in M23-24, are we in G major (key sig F#)? The D's are natural so it IS G major.

There are D#'s introduced in M26 but it's not confirmed in LH until M29 that we've moved to E minor.

In M31 the top voice (soprano?) hold the E while the second voice (alto?) starts. Here the C and D are both natural so we're back to one sharp (G major or E minor) but there are also G#'s. We can't be in E major (F#, C#, D#, G#) so we must be in A minor. If it is A minor the F's need also to be natural. I see no F's until M34 so I guess we're passing through A minor.

In M34 the D#'s are back and the C's are natural so we're back in E minor and the A minor phrase in the alto was just a colouration to echo the soprano E minor phrase.

In M37 the D is natural again and M38 restores C# and adds G#. The LH suggests A major moving to the tonic D major in M40.

There's a passing colour D# in M41 but we're clear to the finish in tonic.

Then I prepare my key scheme diagram and mark off at what measures the key changes occur.

The second half is ||: G major : E minor : D major :|| with some colourful toe-dipping in A minor and A major.

Done.

Terrific, I wasn't far off as it turns out. Was also eying out the A Minor but lost confidence again and opted for G Major instead for some reason.

Question: Part of my problem of course, is scales and recognizing the correct one. I came across this cheater to help me identify the #'s in a scale more readily.

http://www.pianoworld.com/fun/vpc/piano_chords.htm

The trouble is (if we look at just A scales for example)

A Major is correct (TTSTTTS,) but, A Minor has C# D#, A Harmonic Minor has just D#, and Melodic Minor C# D# again.

None of them are TSTTSTT. Is the chart incorrect?

Currently by this above method thus, I am destined for failure.

Here's the deal with the scales, Jeff.

Major is indeed TTSTTTS.

On the minor front the natural minor is TSTTSTT (based on the old Aeolian mode) and the key signature matches it but we don't use it!!

What we do is sharpen the seventh note so that the dominant chord becomes major and leads back to tonic using that 7-8 leading note effect we've been discussing. This creates the Harmonic minor scale (key sig should really be one sharp, G#). This allows the chords (harmony) to work correctly.

If you try to sing a piece in the harmonic minor scale you'll find the augmented second interval between the sixth and seventh step very difficult to get right. So when the melody is rising to tonic we sharpen the sixth as well as the seventh but when descending to tonic there's no need for the leading note effect and we leave both notes in their natural minor state. This is the melodic minor scale (major scale with flattened third rising, natural minor descending).

So in a minor key, the key signature tells us what the key is - not what notes are sharp or flat. We have to KNOW what notes are sharp and flat.

This is difficult to grasp and it does take a while to get into the head - we all go through it. That's why so many people drop out and take up rocket science and brain surgery.

So, key sig shows natural minor but we never use it because the cadences don't work.
Harmonic minor (#7th) works but the singer doesn't.
Melodic minor (#6 & #7 rising, natural falling) lets the singer work but confuses the dickens out of everyone else!

I haven't dropped out yet, but have been seriously considering taking up under water basket weaving.

So, what is next exercise for today? Shall we continue with other little prelude key maps? If so, should we tackle in any particular order so as not have questions and answers jumping around so much?

I've got some business fires to fight today (a site hosting has been hacked, and hosting provider seems to think I should pay to troubleshoot) but will try to keep up with everything nonetheless.

Me too. I also had G major instead of A minor for some reason. Everything else is right though.

I'm looking at #1 again, before moving along to #2. Would just like to ask why we have indicated the F major (because of the Bb I get, but ...) when this right away is cancelled by the B natural in M14. We needed a stronger confirmation than this to indicate key change in prelude #4.

So, I understand passing through it, but would we/should we include in Key diagram?

You're reading the chart incorrectly. The blue color-coding of the black keys in the scale is causing you to misread part of the three-black-key group as the two-black-key group. Check the letter names in the "Notes in Chord/Scale" box to see what the correct notes are, and then see if you can see how those are indicated in blue on the keyboard chart.

I wonder if your measure counts are off. I see those in m.26.

Other counts that I get that are different from an earlier post of yours: There are 20 measures in part A. There are 28 measures in part B. Part B starts at m. 21 and ends at m.48. The last 8 measures of part B repeats the last 8 measures of part A, except this time in the tonic instead of the dominant.

I like the breakdown you did in that post, but it's confusing when the measure numbers are different. It's unfortunate that the linked score doesn't provide measure numbers.

Richard, some of what you wrote resembles what I wrote in my overview. You had the advantage of knowing the piece was similar to scarlatti, and you chose these pieces knowing that already. I was trying to find true binary form, and then had to hunt around to get how its form really worked. In the way I wrote it out yesterday, it was for the purpose of showing a possible way of approaching it, where you start by looking at the entire piece, rather than starting in one small corner and one section at a time. I see you've done the same.

The general picture of this piece is this:

It has two halves, the second being longer than the first. So we know that some development is going on later. The first half starts in D major and modulates to the dominant key which is classical. The second part visits a number of keys and is rather playful. Then it goes back to something that resembles binary form again. It takes that last 8 measures from the first portion and repeats them exactly, but in the original key of D major.

I am trying to make it more succinct by taking out all the extra details.

I get a strong feeling when I'm playing this piece that M13, M14 and M15 are distinct phrases. You could quite easily argue that M9-12 are an antecedent and M13-16 are a consequent but I get M9-10 as an antecedent, M11-M12 as a consequent and M13-16 as four separate phrases. On another day I can see it your way.

F is not strongly pointed to in the bass except for the last half of the bar, but in that last half I feel a strong inclination to F.

However you see it and/or hear it is what matters. There isn't a right or wrong answer here (unless you think it's passing through E-flat or something) and neither interpretation interferes with what I'm looking for, which is modulation through closely related keys ending in tonic.

When you're going through the others the accidentals should pull your eye in, check around for significant signs to confirm or dispute your speculations, pay attention to the bass, probably the strongest indicator, and the phrasing (listen or sing it if it's not marked) and then make a judgement call.

Did he just make a fleeting visit? Did he stop for lunch? Or did he camp overnight?


Delighted you're keeping up, Carol.

You are right, PianoStudent88. My penciled in number 1 is in the wrong place so every quoted measure is off by one. I'll fix it in my score but it's too late to edit my post. If you make each number one less than quoted then you should be in the right measure. Sorry about that.

What you wrote is great, keystring. It's a much more universal approach than was mine. I approached, as you say, with the advantage of foresight and also of knowing why I'm looking at these particular pieces.

You also are more aware of other binary forms. I'm only interested (as far as this thread is concerned) in the binary form of the 1700-1740 period that led to the development of sonata form.

Agreed. Actually reading/understanding chart correctly but was hasty in writing this up and with not thorough enough quality assurance. Should have written up F# G# vs C# D#.

Nonetheless, this chart is helpful if I can just stay clear on which scale to reference.



Actually I will be happy to stick with your way. This raises a good point in that I had not listened to it (certainly not playing yet,) prior to this query and was relying on the score only. Both though, are clearly in order.

Yes, I saw that. Here people are learning about binary form for the first time, and you are leading them into it, as I understand it. It doesn't have to be you alone, but the main idea is that they are learning about this form.

You are suggesting that people not "analyze" the piece (meaning, to go at it chord by chord, measure by measure, from beginning to end). But if they are to do an approach where they get an overview of the piece as binary, and are then able to use the ability to see broad patterns, then they have to know how to do it. I don't know how much our completed conclusions will help to do that. Sometimes models can be a first step - dunno.



Since I studied the simpler, earlier forms, personally I find the form that you presented more interesting. Why should I work with what I have already studied? But again, here you are presenting binary form for the first time to people. I found that my studies of the simpler, Baroque period binary form helped me navigate this piece. I don't know whether I could have made the leap straight into this form. I might have been able to, but having worked with the simpler, more predictable form helped me. I focused on the simpler forms from a teaching point of view.

Here is what work with simple binary form gave me:
- The phrases were much more visible and obvious. While learning to recognize them in their original form, and then modulated and expanded, it was better to have these not be subtle. It was better to have less variables. It's like a primary school book with big letters and obvious words.
- I acquired a habit of seeing phrases, and then seeing them again in other places. It was like seeing John, then seeing John wearing a suit, John in pajamas, John in a clown costume standing on his head.
- I moved to analyzing sonatinas, and presently sonatas. My ability to recognize John in a clown costume now helps me with the sonatas. This particular type of awareness and habit are now part of me.

As I write this I am also considering my study materials, where their strength and weaknesses lay. I am curious, if I had skipped these things and gone straight to the 1700-1740 binary form, what would that have given me? If instead of analyzing a piece myself, I read somebody else's conclusions, could this have served as a model where eventually I absorb the patterns by a kind of osmosis, and then move forward from there? (The subject of teaching and learning is an obsession, as you might have noticed. )