Good luck with your analysis, but remember, please, always analyse what it sounds like, and beware getting carried away by what it looks like In this case, the third beat will only be clear when you hear the next bar. Piston is often good, but there are times when his analysis in 2-part works is doubtful, but then Bach is (deliberately?) ambiguous.Often you can only be sure what one chord is when you hear the next. Your analysis has more formal structure support as it is the first measure of the 4 bar phrase, however, I am opened to all opinions for now as I expect to learn from you guys. Personally, I would spend some time to verfiy the III 6/4 chord as I rarely encounter it in the analysis of Bach's music, and I am sure it's going to be a fun and exciting weekend for me. Piston's book, although I of course can't verify the accuracy. Post Edited (Peter West) : 10:38:37 PM GMTĪs I stated, the Roman Numeral analysis was taken from W. Post Edited (Peter West) : 10:21:13 PM GMTįar more interesting than the second beat is the third beat. G and F in the right hand theoretically for the same reason, but wouldn't have the brightness of the original). (I don't know why I said G and F though when it is clearly a B flat and A, but the same applies: the B flat is an accented auxiliary from an implied A in the first chord and resolves back to confirm the silent A while the bass passes through a 7th. I stay with my original interpretation, not only because it is analytically sound in theory, but that is what it sounds like. But this isn't a Chorale, and that is an important distinction. This is typical of his polyphonic instrumental style, but he would not have done it in Chorales. In this case the right hand B flat is a auxilliary note of sorts from an implied note in the first chord. The interesting thing about Bach's 2 part writing is his use of inferred voices. Bach rarely used chord III in this way and it's not correctly prepared for a second inversion chord. Listen to it for H*****s sake, it's obviously wrong. The III 6/4 interpretation is hypothetical nonsense. The accents are in the wrong place for this to be a parallel interpretation. ![]() ![]() That's an interesting comparison, but i contest your analysis because you have not taken harmonic rhythm into account. 47, Vater unser im Himmelreich.TIF 28KB (image/tiff) Could you direct me to scores with III 6/4 chord? Thank you very much! Chrisīach, Chorale No. Naturally, v6 here occur in the strong while the event in the original post occurs in the weak beat which satisfy the passing 6/4 requirement. Could you offer insights as comparing two music events. Thanks, Jim! Your insight is very much appreciated! The reason that I stated that it might be the v6 instead of III 6/4 is because I read W. I also tend to analyze things the way I hear them (correct theoretical practice or not) and that chord sounds like a III6/4 to me. I suppose anything is possible, but I would shy away from the v chord because 2 consecutive first inversion chords would be less characteristic than a passing 6/4 on a weak beat. ![]() Is that possible to consider this chord as "v" from descending melodic minor? and then consider the 3rd beat as IV6 instead of VI? Judging by the bassline, this III6/4 chord would have to be the Passing 6/4 chord, but that way, the linear concept of Passing Six-Four chord is not demonstrated in Bach's score (that's why I was confused). (In classical analysis, the Bb cannot be analyzed as a suspension in this case because it does not contain a preparation.) In classical analysis, the Bb is an appoggiatura. I agree with Pete's edited analysis - III 6/4. Post Edited (Pete Sawchuk) : 11:39:59 AM GMT PowerMac G4 Dual 867Mhz w/ 1 Gb RAM, 23" Apple Cinema Display PowerBook G4 12" 867Mhz w/ 256Mb RAMĮdirol PCR-30 Keyboard Controller w/ built-in USB interface Oops!Īnyway, I'm still calling it a III 6/4 chord, now with Bb "sus4" resolving to A. And yes, the left-hand C certainly is a passing note in the harmony, but I'd probably call the whole thing a III 6/4 chord in context.ĮDIT: O.K., at least some of the above is irrelevant as a 2nd look reveals the very faint 1st line of the treble staff, making the right hand notes Bb to A rather than G to F. I agree w/ Peter's assessment of the right-hand G as an auxiliary note. Mac 1.2GHz Dual G4/OSX.3.3/20 inch Cinema display and 20 inch CRT I think here the chord has not changed, the g is an accented auxiliary note, (the f is the harmony note), while the C in the bass is a passing note functioning as a kind of 7th (a passing 7th). The interesting thing about bach's 2 part writing is the harmonic ambiguity.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |