Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum Starting out with analysis, all invited

+1 to the above quote.

Excellent thread so far guys. I don't really have anything to contribute yet, but learning a great deal so far.
I find it interesting how music, no matter how solidly it is written (articulation, dynamics etc) can be interpreted in so many different ways, depending on the person. I guess this matches up to personalities in general.

I do have a quick question, may be a silly one, but, someone a few posts back mentioned playing the final chord as an arpeggio. Now I understand what an arpeggio is, but what is the difference between playing it arpeggio, as opposed to a broken chord?

Neil.

Well, the PDF worked, but not the MSCZ or XML. It was just so very slow that I didn't see the e-mail until tonight. Just for test purposes, here's a link:

[url=https://www.pianoworld.com/Uploads/files/Norbert_Schultze_Lili_Marlene_C_LS_Analysis1.pdf]

If that works, I'll try the others again. MSCZ would be nice to have since we both use MuseScore, and XML for other programs.

Edit: That worked, sort of. The URL is there, but not clickable. It works if you copy and paste it into a new tab. But the good news is that the file can be downloaded from there. So, if I can get the MSCZ and XML to work, you'll be able to modify -- OK, correct -- them.... ;-)

Edit2: Here's a test of just plain old pasting the URL into the message instead of using the link button:

http://www.pianoworld.com/Uploads/files/Norbert_Schultze_Lili_Marlene_C_LS_Analysis1.pdf

I'll check that now.

Edit3: Wowie! That's even better. It hyperlinks like it spozed to and the file is downloadable. ;-)

Edit4: I tried the other file formats, and got an error message that they're not allowed.

The reason for mentioning this is that in lead sheet notation you may encounter any note at all under the slash, not just ones from the chord above the slash. Writing Cm6/F instead of F9 means to play the F, G, and A adjacent to each other, rather than using the G an octave up.

Yes, particularly if the piece is long. I think it's sort of like taking a long road trip through the hills. Some hills are higher than others. You can probably tell which is the highest you can see from where you are. But if the trip is long enough, it may be difficult to decide which was the highest of them all.

And it's not particularly old. It just went into public domain a year or two ago.



Aha -- That's something I got wrong. I learned to play a little, and tried to count. It didn't work. So I just gave up on the whole counting thing, and kept on playing. I go by my memory of what songs are supposed to sound like. I don't even try to play things I haven't heard before.

That's quite a thorough post. The one thing you didn't mention are tuplets -- triplets, quintuplets, etc. I sort of just play them without giving it much thought. Is there anything we should know about them? Are they more common in popular songs than elsewhere, perhaps because lyrics force the count?

Yes, and it's also possible to change keys within a piece. If it goes to a different key for just a few bars, the composer or arranger may decide to use accidentals rather than taking up more space on the page with multiple key signatures.

/ notation is used to indicate what note within the chord belongs on the bottom, if other than the root. It does not, however indicate where, or how you should play the rest of the chord.

Edit: You could write it as Cm6/F of course, if it helps you to interpret where you need to be and what notes you need to play. But, better notation of the notes that make up this chord (any order (and any where on the register ,) but knowing that the F belongs on the bottom) is:

F,A,C,Eb,G = F9

I have a word for people that want to play the F, G and A adjacent to each other. You don't want to know that word!

I would play F7, F-A-C-Eb, and drop the G if I couldn't reach it.

Most scholars, especially classical, recommend the bass note be included in the chord name given to avoid confusion over possible mistakes in the reading or the writing. It is a notational convention that can be understood even by those shorthanders who put whatever they like after the slash.

Here's a suggestion for an analysis checklist/template.

Composer, title and date.
A brief outline of the composers life that can be gradually built up over a number of years. It's possible to learn a lot about a piece simply by 'knowing' the composer, his style, how he fits into our music history, et cetera.

The title can be significant to an understanding of the piece. Calling it a Prelude or a Sonata sets up known parameters within which we'll be working and how significant certain aspects of the composition are. Song titles will have an effect on the interpretation more than the musical content.

The date, too, can be significant to understanding the musical language and how it fits into its contemporary scene and its historical perspective.

Key and time signature, tempo indication.
The key is of great practical benefit in reading any piece but it is significant in tonal music. Knowing a piece by Mozart or Beethoven is in C minor gives us a wealth of knowledge and a much different expectation about the piece than if it was in, say, D major.

The tempo indication gives precisely that - an indication. All of us live to the beat of our own drum and slow to a dealer on the NYSE can be uncatchable for a painter of still life.

Genre, form, structure, scale (size), proportion, landmarks, key scheme

Texture, colour (chromaticism) and dynamic range

Rhythmic dependence, diversity and details

Melodic, thematic, figurative or motivic treatment

Phrase length, expansion, contraction, augmentation, diminution, inversion, reversal

Harmonic complexity, breadth and variety

Tension and release, symmetry, unity

Use of sequence, repetition and variation

Harmonic descent through the circle of fifths

Melodic appoggiaturas, enharmonic change, new or unprepared harmonies

Sudden dynamic, rhythmic, melodic or textural change

Repeated syncopation or rhythmic subversion

Rhythmic, harmonic or melodic acceleration to a cadence

Delayed final cadence
_____________________

Music is sound - the movement of air against our ear dums. Without air, or another atmosphere, it can't be heard. But it still exists and fills our heads. We can hold our breath and still hear it in our heads. For me, it is a paradox.

We have two ways of preserving it. Recording the sounds, e.g. tape, shellac, vinyl and now CD's and mp3's etc., so that we can hear it or recording the notation, sheet music, so that we can read it.

Academia puts a heavy reliance on the latter and teaches harmonic analysis. This is basically taking the sheet music notation, putting labels on it, naming the chords and cadences, and discussing the theory behind it.

And that's it. Effectively translating the dots on a stave into Roman numerals, letter chords and proper nouns. And, by and large, it stops there.

Tonal music is governed by conventions, not rules, and as we grow up with these conventions we develop expectations. Repetition, cliché and convention are not the bane of music, they are its life blood. It is our reliance on these expectations that composers are able to surprise us, delight us, emotionally grab us, twist us, release us and leave us drained, addicted and begging for more.

For me, analysis starts where the academic analysis stops.

Music tells a story. I don't want to read the words like a list of ingredients on the side of a packet. I want to make that story mine and tell it with passion. That demands an understanding of the music and knowing what makes it work, why and how. I don't need to write my own stories, I have stories by Bach, Beethoven and The Beatles. I want to put my creative energy into the narration.
______________________

If we put each piece in its own thread we need to cover the rudiments in every thread (theory, harmony, notation systems etc.) or keep them separate. If we keep them separate how do you, as a reader, know you've covered everything we're talking about (or do you get lost and overawed as in the Classical Sonata Analysis thread) and how do we as writers know how to pitch what we're writing - how much does our target audience know?

If we keep everything together we can keep the discussion at a level suitable for everyone and field questions from new participants as knowledge refreshment for thread veterans. It's easier to go back through a long thread to revisit a topic you're not sure of than it is to go back through a trail of individual threads. The process can be made easier by updating an index of pieces and topics covered every time we start a new topic/piece. You can also print the thread to a file and search on relevant keywords and be sure you've not missed anything. You can't do that with multiple threads.

I have a word for musical fascists of any colour who tell me what is good/bad/acceptable/unacceptable – many of you will already know that word.



Then you’ve nothing of any interest to say on the playing of F9




Most scholars confine themselves to dusty cloisters remaining ignorant of the broader musical world evolving around them. Conventions surrounding slash chords spring from common sense and most of all for the benefit of easy reading/writing. Well worth developing the discussion further but I think it's somewhat off topic (or perhaps just premature).

I like your chords sinophilia. For M7 I would write the first chord in this measure as C/G.

M1 - C
M2 - G
M3 - G
M4 - C
M5 - C
M6 - F
M7 - C/G, G
M8 - C

I would respond differently to F9 but why not put that instead of Cm6/F?

I'd still prefer to restrict the notation for a 'Starting out..' thread but on the other points I concede, as always, to your broader knowledge and greater experience.

In fact I’d prefer F9 but there is some potential utility in Cm6/F - that’s something for another time.


"... broader knowledge and greater experience."

Not at all. Different knowledge and experience with perhaps some commonality. Let’s just say it’s better to stick to what one knows.

I know what I know and I know there's a lot more of what I don't know, but I don't know if what I think is wrong is wrong because it's wrong or because it doesn't agree with what I have learned to be right or if I just haven't learned that far yet or if it's one of those things that are greater than is dreamt of in my philosophy.

I apologise in advance for an overly eager mouth and an all too eager foot.

I'm starting to think this thread isn't going to be for me after all.

Neil, if it's because of the daunting list of things to consider in analysis, or the complicated ideas on slash chords, consider them aberrations. Discussion threads will always wander off like that. This is for BEGINNING (starting out) analysis, starting with simple, basic things. I have a huge respect and love for simple basic things because everything complex is built on them. The simple basic things are also extremely profound, and it is a mistake when books and courses geared for adults skim through them.

I started as an adult student on another instrument, and went very fast through the first grades without discussing theory at all. When I finally caught up to it, this was a hugely important thing. The fact of meter made a tremendous difference to how I played a piece.

So, that would be a C chord with the G as bottom note, right? What my Alfred's books call a C in 2nd inversion. This slash thing looks interesting.

Correct. It is another way of looking at chords where we assume CEG (C on the bottom is a default), and if another note is on the bottom, that note is named after the slash. In more complex music, there may even be a note on the bottom which doesn't belong to the chord. The musician can see instantly what's in the whole chord. For people who play by ear and improvise, this is important.

It seemed to be going in a direction that was going over my head. I have learnt a little about chords and chord inversions, from a study at home course I was using (Will Barrow's Learn and Master Piano) when I was self teaching for a couple of months, then I realised a teacher was a better option. We haven't really gone into chords yet, apart from practicing broken chords and arpeggios.

I'll try and keep up because it is all fascinating and obviously beneficial, I'd just hate to get lost and confused.

Neil.