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

I'm not familiar with the piece you were playing, so I don't know how it was supposed to be. But other than a few little hesitations, nothing stuck out to me as being unintended.

Personally, I don't even bother trying to do any counting at all. I probably do what you call "internalizing the sound" -- I just think of it as knowing how it's supposed to go.

I use the free MuseScore program for writing musical notation, and it has a playback feature built in. You can hear how it plays "Lili Marlene" in the links I posted.

It plays what you've written with absolute mathematical precision. What I've learned from transcribing stuff exactly as written into MuseScore is that the temporal aspect of musical notation is simply inadequate. If you could count with absolute precision, just like a computer, the results wouldn't sound quite right.

I did another experiment, using the free (notice a pattern here?) Audacity sound editing program. I checked the exact timings in some good performances, and found that the duration of a beat could vary quite a bit.

So, my conclusion is that the old counting thing can be used to get you in the ballpark, but once you're close, you have to put it aside and do what feels and sounds right to you.

Thanks for the reply John. I know what you mean, but I have noticed when I can actually count out an area of music, it does sound better and more accurate.

I'm working on a piece LIMBO and the middle area was sloppy at first. since it had even 8th notes, I started counting and it cleaned it right up. I know if I could count everything, it would be a marked improvement.

I agree once this part is down then you can your own dynamics.

The nice thing about rhythm, Mark..., is that it never changes despite it being sped up or slowed down. Slow the practicing way down, with a metronome if necessary, and you'll likely find you can keep track of beat subdivisions easily with practice this way. Then, slowly increase the tempo.

Lili Marlene:

1. Overview: Are there any things in this score that you don't know what they are? Ask here!

The seventh chords are new. I understand now how they are formed by adding a minor third to the primary chord, but I’m not sure if I would recognize these chords yet if I came across them in music where they weren’t labeled as such.

2. Time signature: What is the time signature? What does that mean?

I don’t understand what the “C” means for timing. I see though that there is the equivalent four quarter notes in every measure. Why isn’t the time signature listed as 4/4 time?

3. Key: What key is this in? How do you know?
There are no sharps or flats in the key signature. The piece starts with a C chord in the LH and ends the same way. The final note of the piece in the melody is C. There are also F chords, and G (though they are G7) chords. So I might guess it is C major.

4. Melody: What phrases (smaller groups) does the melody divide into? Where would you put slight pauses in playing it? Where is the climax? Would you play any parts of it louder or softer?

Oh my, well without listening to one of the recordings, I don’t know what I would say about this from just looking at the music.

5. Harmony: What are the names of the chords in each measure? For this initial piece, just consider the notes in the bass clef. (Later on we'll ask about the notes in the treble clef too.) What is the first chord? What is the last chord?

The chords are written in this one, and I’m not sure yet how well I would do recognizing these new 7th chords. The C#dim is also new in measure 13.

6. Playing: Can you play or pick out parts or all of this, even if very slowly? If it seems daunting: try just the melody alone, with just one finger if you want. Try just the lowest notes in the bass clef. Try finding all the notes of each chord.

I played this through, and then tried what Greener did with the suggestion of voicing. But Greener is way ahead of me on that one because I didn’t have any ideas about what I would do differently for the voicing!

Lilli Marlene: I printed out the score and started to go through it. Something doesn't seem to be right about it. Measure 15 should end on the C chord, and the G7 shouldn't drag into it. You would have the strongest ending chord come after the beat. The same in m.10 going into 11. While looking for something to compare it with, I found this very delightful set of variations, which also makes the chords quite audible.

Which version are your looking at? I think perhaps the bar 15 fix is in version 2c, the latest one. On bar 10 to 11, do you mean to delete the ties and go to a quarter rest instead? Or make the change on the first beat, even though it's dissonant?

I think I've confused things by posting a new version for every fix, so perhaps it's better that I wait until I'm back on the fast computer in the office on Monday, and address all the weekend's corrections then.

The YouTube link you posted includes some Russian versions after the variations, and one of them has a chart on screen with completely different durations.... There's even a Russian lyrics version of Horst Wessel, you find the strangest stuff on YouTube.

A dissonance might arise depending on whether this was to be treated as a solo piano piece (I guess that’s the idea) or as an accompaniment to a vocalist.

For the latter, a very basic piano accompaniment might be a simple oom-pah kind of thing; a single LH root note for beats 1 and 3 and a RH chord for beats 2 and 4. You’d then have no problem in bar 11 where you would play just the note C (LH) on beat 1 and the RH chord on beat 2.

As a solo piano piece the C chord falling on beat 2 without anything playing on beat 1 is awkward to say the least. A better way would be to find a chord for beat 1. This could be the G7 played again. Or you could try another chord there. This could be a useful ear-experiment. Perhaps first try out some roots before trying to add the upper notes (of course, you know the melody F is one of them!).

To give it a bit of extra balance I'd probably put a chord on beat 3 as well.

-just a suggestion....

Here's the part that bothers me the most. [edit: of the previous version before it was edited.]

Lille Marlene has a very strong marching beat. 1-2-3-4 It is about a young soldier caught in the he-ll of war dreaming of Lille, lighthearted dance and love. So the melody itself is jaunty and gay, while the accompaniment is a military march. It begins with a bugle call. So for the G7 starting beat 3 of m. 10 to be carried into the first beat of m. 11, this breaks up the rhythm. I think whoever wrote this wanted to harmonize the F in m. 11 and so extended the G7. But that F is a typical appoggiatura.

Similarly, the last measure should start the C on beat 1. This is extremely important because we have the final cadence** and we want the cadence to conclude on a strong beat - not half way through beat 1. What is really happening here is that the last three notes include an embellishment. You could shorten the two notes into sixteenths (or some other rhythm) and then C would start on beat 1.


** Cadence: V-I or V7-I is used to end a piece or a section of a piece. Think of fanfare: Ta-DAAA!

Lili Marlene:

I will try to help with some of this Valencia. But, only the parts I feel confident with. I'll leave the rest for the experts. I've just learned most of this stuff myself, on the Sonata Analysis thread.

2. Time Signature: The C is for Common Time. 4/4 is the most common. So, correct this is in 4/4 common time.

3. Key: Your analysis is dead on. Yes, this is in the key of C for the reasons you have explained.

4. Melody: For help with determining what KS has asked us to look for, I would absolutely suggest listening to recordings. It isn't cheating. Try and become very familiar with it through this type of review, before even playing your first note. Personally, if I tried to do much of this from just the score, I would be in trouble. Use, whatever is available to you is my advice.

6. Voicing: How are you playing the chords now? If you are playing the chords as a block in your LH, you could try splitting up the block between L and RH for these few chords, to see the difference and see if you like it.

The new Video KS has posted shows several variations of playing the same tune and some give an entirely different mood. This is partly voicing and partly style and expression.

keystring and dire tonic,

this was fixed, at PS88's suggestion, in post #2020432, just a few of posts ago.

Saw this later

The second. We discussed appoggiatura in Happy Birthday. The "Bir-" of Birthday is dissonant and then it resolves into "Day". It is often used in measure 1 of waltzes, because that dissonance resolving in beat 2 creates a strong rhythm through the way it rubs and then doesn't rub.

I wish we had a separate section for theory and analysis, along with stickies for information on concepts such as appoggiatura, key signatures etc.



I didn't watch it to the end and should. It sounds interesting. I was hoping that someone who is used to taking music that is heard, and deriving the chords from it, might be able to jump in. I can hear melody, but am still quite weak in hearing and recognizing chords. It's something that I'm working on, at my end.

I see it was edited since last night. Thanks.

Do you think the corrections might be good for learning, because it shows some aspects of rhythm, timing, and harmony and how they work together? Or is it confusing to people? I've learned the most from my mistakes, and there have been some doozies.

I'd encourage others to compare the two and field questions on their findings rather than dissect them myself.

Curious: Is anyone into military lore and know whether the bugle call at the beginning is a particular bugle call, and if so, what it signals?

- I don't see any fix. In that post I still see the C chord on beat 2 of 11 with a tie from bar 10.

For the military feel you'll need something like the oom-pah accompaniment I suggested above. A good example starting at 1.00 in the 'variations' youtube clip you posted.

It also circumvents the 10/11 problem

Ah, I see it now. Measures 14 - 15 (end) have been fixed, but m. 10 - 11 still have the problem.

Having just discovered this thread, I have a few comments/requests.

First of all, a big "Thank you!" to PianoStudent88 and all contributing their knowledge to this discussion. It will be good to have a thread, or series of threads, that focus on elementary/intermediate theory and analysis.

Second, thanks everyone for the useful additional materials — hand-written scoring, performance videos, etc. Of course, any thread that includes a video clip of Victor Borge's brilliant piano comedy gets a thumbs up from me.

Third, a recommendation: For anyone providing a score for analysis/discussion, please provide quality pdfs or high-res images — and don't be afraid to use larger staves and notes! Some of us have aging eyes, and low-res screen-shots/jpgs just don't print large enough or cleanly enough to be easily legible.

Finally, a question: Is there any way to limit how far discussions go before we get to move on to another piece? I'm still working through most of the earlier pages but the discussion obviously has gone rather deep into chord theory, far beyond the ken of a number of people here. At what point (Is there an identifiable point?) does the thread lose its intended usefulness for beginner/intermediate players? It would be nice to figure out now how we can keep this thread/topic manageable.

- Should select person(s) be responsible for calling a halt on discussions and asking for the next score to be introduced?

- Should we simply introduce a new piece every "X" pages?

- Several people have recommended that posters just change the title/subject line to reflect the piece under discussion, but people won't always know/think to do that at the time, plus quoted posts may bring in their own title (? not sure), and that's all a headache, IMO.

- I recommend that we simply create separate threads for each piece under discussion, using a standard thread subject line. "Music Analysis 101: Happy Birthday", "Music Analysis: Lili Marlene", etc. should work. Each of these threads can be as long and involved as the posters want, and no one has to worry about changing the subject line, and people don't have to scroll through page after page to figure out where/if a different piece has been introduced yet or not, etc.

Welcome, piano_deb. I would ask people to please not change the subject line on an existing thread, because it doesn't change in all the displays, and is confusing. Adding a heading in bold to a post is recommended.

OK, new threads per piece. Do we want to start a new thread for Lili Marlene, or start a new thread with the next piece?

Would people like to see different threads for various areas of music theory? For example, major keys, minor keys, chords, intervals? Or a general music theory thread separate from the pieces threads? I'm not sure how well this idea can work because I think all the topics bleed into each other, and discussion of areas of music theory also bleeds into the analysis of any particular piece. And it's the nature of discussion on all of these threads that more advanced topics get asked about even as some people are still working through the basic topics. But I'm willing to try it if people think it would be helpful.

I would start with a new thread for the next piece. And why don't we use a code giving the order, something like:
Analysis 02_Title of piece after Lili Marlene
Analysis 03_Title of the next piece
and so on.
So it's possible start from the beginning and follow the path, or if I don't understand something I go back to the previous threads looking for topics already covered.