Download Stephanie Reusch Paper 2 Composers use several types of non

Stephanie Reusch
Paper 2
Composers use several types of non-chord tones, each suggesting a different
purpse. Surely, listeners distinguish between sections of music that have no non-chord
tones and sections that have many. This suggests that there may be some sort of spectrum
that defines the texture of the music based on its usage of non-chord tones. Perhaps a
section with no non-chord tones would be considered “texturally stable” and perhaps a
section with many non-chord tones would be considered “texturally unstable”. In his
Piano Sonata in A minor (K310), Mozart’s treatment if non-chord tones cause contrast in
textural stability in order to exaggerate certain formal functions.
When writing in Sonata Form, composers of the classical period often write the
first section of the exposition, “P”, with a very stable texture and a simpler harmonic
texture than its following sections. In this Sonata, Mozart forms “P” in a sentence, and
the sentence’s presentation would have a stable texture if it weren’t for a few simple
alterations that Mozart made. In the first four bars, most of the notes in the melodic right
hand all belong to the respective harmony in the left hand, with the exception of a few
passing tones in the 3rd measure. However, Mozart chooses to insert dissonant grace
notes, just instantaneously preceding the downbeat in measures 1, 2 and 4. Though
seemingly small due to their incredibly small rhythmic value, these grace notes create an
obvious, striking dissonance that disrupts the stability of the melody of the presentation
of P. The grace notes in measures 2 and 4 are suspensions, perhaps creating a feeling of
wanting to prolong the tonic harmony rather than moving to the dominant. Mozart adds
one more non-chord tone to the presentation of “P”: the pedal “A” in the lowest voice of
the left hand, again perhaps prolonging the idea of tonic during the dominant harmony.
Because P is the first section of the piece, part of it’s function is to establish the key, so
it’s no wonder that Mozart attempts to exaggerate and prolong the tonic with these nonchord tones. Though these non-chord tones certainly weaken the textural stability of the
presentation, the listener still admires that the presentation is still quite texturally strong.
However, perhaps all of these uncharacteristic non-chord tones in the presentation
cause the continuation of P- though normally more texturally unstable than the
presentation- to be exaggeratedly texturally unstable. Though the harmonic rhythm in
continuations often accelerates from the harmonic rhythm in the presentation, the
harmonic rhythm in this continuation is particularly fast in that it is somewhat sequential,
but also has a sense of lagging as Mozart delays the arrival of the expected pitch or
harmony using non-chord tones. On the downbeat of measure 6, the listener expects to
hear either a d minor chord or a G major chord, which both are instead heard on beats 2
and 3 respectively. Instead, Mozart prolongs the top voice in the right hand and raise the
2nd voice in the right hand to create a sort of tonicizing sonority that also has elements of
the lagging feeling, created by the prolongation of the top voice. Though this sonority
technically isn’t a non-chord tone because it is the only sonority occurring at that point, it
intrudes on what it is expected by the listener, making it a sort of potential non-chord
sonority. Mozart ends the continuation with a very texturally stable measure 8 that
contains no non-chord tones as if the measure is trying to make up for all the non-chord
tones and unexpectedness in other measure, and the very texturally stable ending to “P”
gives the music confidence to start “TR”. Though P ends stably, the listener should not
forget that the non-chord tones in the presentation slightly shook its textural stability in
order to prolong the tonic, influencing the continuation of P to delay the arrival of
expected harmonies, consequently make P abnormally less texturally stable than it often
is.
The strong and texturally stable ending of P leads cadences into to the beginning
of TR, as if the strength of the cadence allowed the music to keep going and try again. TR
starts with the same dissonant grace note as P, in fact, Mozart writes the beginning of TR
to essentially identical to the beginning of P, save for some embellishing passing tones.
When TR begins to modulate in measure 12, one would expect a less stable texture, but
this measure is actually the most stable texture the listener has encountered so far. This
measure corresponds to measure 4, but the harmony has switched to an F dominant 7th
chord and thus the pitches have been changed. This time, the dissonant grace note is
written into the music as an eighth note and is actually a C that moves down to B flat,
which are both in the F dominant 7th chord. It is strange that Mozart decided to start a
modulation in TR with such a clear harmonic texture, especially because it is more stable
that the tonic sections of TR. The texture becomes less and less stable until the music
starts standing on the dominant. Suspensions return in measure 13 and 14. In measure 14,
the harmonic rhythm speeds up to a sort of mini-circle of fifths sequence in the left hand,
but the right hand does not quite keep up. At first the right hand is a half beat behind the
left hand due to a suspension on the downbeat, and on beat 3, the listener expects the F
from beat two (the seventh of the chord) to resolve down to an E, the third of the outlined
C major chord. However, Mozart instead tries to embellish the expected E by tonicizing it
with a D#, however because the right hand is later than the left, Mozart does not resolve
to the expected E until beat four, leaving the D# placed during beat three. Strangely, D#
is enharmonically equivalent to E-flat, so the sonority heard during beat three sounds like
a C minor chord instead of the expected C major chord. Perhaps Mozart creates this very
loose, incredibly syncopated almost polyrhythmic texture with tonicizing non-chord tones
and suspensions to exaggerate the modulating function of TR, especially by the
extremely fast sequence seen in measure 14. Perhaps he created a sonority
enharmonically equivalent to a c minor chord to foreshadow that the rest of TR is in C
minor. Mozart then stands on the dominant from measures 16-22 to emphasize how the
TR has modulated to C minor. During measures 16-22, Mozart reminds the listener of the
presentation of P by repeating the same rhythmic motive found in the first three beats of
P. Here, the few non-chord tones that are present function as embellishing notes,
surrounding the note “G” to emphasize the dominant. One would probably describe the
end of TR to be very texturally stable because of its limited amount of syncopation, the
clarity of its harmony and the tonicizing function of its few non-chord tones. One might
notice that the ends of both P and TR are the strongest texturally stable sections the
listener has heard so far in this piece. One might notice that P and TR both start out
texturally stable with the exception of some suspensions that delay resolution, then they
both have a very loose and unstable continuation followed by an incredibly strong and
texturally stable ending. Perhaps Mozart adds non-chord tones that almost sound like
mistakes to represent mistakes in a performance, causing the continuation of phrases to
be looser and less texturally stable as a result of loss of confidence due to the mistakes
made, only to cause the ending of these formal functions to be strong enough to try again
and start a new phrase.
The texture during S of the exposition changes drastically. A simple bass line of
eighth notes and quarter notes all containing chord tones dictate the harmony, but Mozart
creates an incredibly busy texture in the right hand by writing a constant stream of 16th
notes filled with just as many non-chord tones as chord tones, if not more. Most of the
non-chord tones seem to be neighbor notes and they typically are not placed on the
downbeat. It seems as if Mozart had a melody in mind for the right hand that contained
mostly chord tones but the adding of so many neighbor notes (sometimes there are 3
neighbor non-chord tones for every 1 chord tone) seems almost as if the pianist isn’t sure
exactly which note to hit, so he or she hits all of the notes around. This imprecision seems
to again cause more textural instability in the antecedent or beginning part of the phrase.
In the continuation, the bass line is no longer concise eighth notes, but rather an
ambiguous sequence made up of suspensions that modulates to F major in measure 31,
only to become once again more texturally stable in measure 32 in order to cadence back
into C major. In measure 32, the bass line becomes a steady stream of arpeggiating 16th
notes, and though there are non-chord tones in the right hand, the ratio of chord tones to
non-chord tones is much higher, and the non-chord tones are generally consonant with
the bass line. As one might notice, S follows the pattern of a somewhat texturally stable
beginning, texturally unstable middle and a very texturally stable end just like P and TR,
however all sections are relatively more texturally unstable than the corresponding
sections in P and TR. Perhaps here Mozart is trying to exaggerate how S needs not to be
as tight-knit as P. One also notices Mozart’s exaggeration of how S is more loosely knit
in the second phrase in S, where he also uses very many neighbor tones as well as having
a loosely knit 5-measure phrase structure.
In the C section of the exposition at measure 44, Mozart reminds the listener of
the presentation of P by imitating the initial motive again. However, though he reminds
the listener of stability by doing this, he also reminds the listener of the instable bass line
of running 16th notes, this time suggesting new harmonies. Rather than just tonic and
dominant harmonies like at P, the running 16th notes create new harmonies that
exaggerate cadential motion, thus here Mozart uses what earlier would have been
considered non-chord tones to create a texture that exaggerates the cadential function of
C.
Mozart splits the development of this piece into 3 separate sections. He derives
the first section from TR, this time in C major, and again tries to modulate to F. However,
a dominant 7th chord in F is enharmonically equivalent to a German 6/5 chord in E, so
Mozart ends the first section by modulating to E using a German 6/5 chord. Non-chord
tones affect the textural stability here just as it did in the beginning of TR.
The second section of the transition occurs from measures 57 to 69 and consists of
3 sequences. Each sequence begins with an introduction measure containing the same
rhythmic quote of the motif from the beginning of P then moves on to the sequence.
During each sequence, the left hand keeps a steady stream of 16th notes that repeat the
dominant of the key suggested by the German 6/5 chord preceding this section. This
pedal has one chromatic neighbor non-chord tone in it, weakening the textural stability,
but the pedal itself prolongs the dominant harmony. Each downbeat of every measure in
the sequence contains a suspension, and these suspensions are resolved and then
tonicized by chromatic neighbor tones. This creates a very unstable texture with a lot of
neighbor tones all at once, perhaps the most unstable section of this piece, as
developments often are. The first sequence resolves into E major, which resolves to A
major, which resolves to d minor, sort of creating a giant descending 5ths macrosequence created from 3 smaller sequences. The goal of this section of a development is
to get to a far out point (which seems to be d minor), and by modulating to so many keys
using so many sequences, Mozart has exaggerated the function of this section once again.
Mozart’s use of non-chord tones that delay resolution along with non-chord tones that
tonicize and emphasize resolution seems almost as if he tonicizes the resolution in order
to make up for the delay of it. This idea is similar to the pattern seen in the exposition
with the closing section being extremely texturally strong in order to make up for the
continuation’s textural instability.
The last section of the development begins at measure 69 and again starts with a
sequence that leads into standing on the dominant in measure 73 until the recapitulation
starts in measure 79. The function of this section of the development is to navigate back
to the home key of A minor so that the recapitulation can start. This section starts
somewhat texturally unstable because of the use of neighbor and passing tones in the
bass. This instability along with the looser knit phrase structure involving a sequence
exaggerates the motion of getting back to the tonic key. However, once Mozart reaches
the tonic key in measure 72, the textural stability grows stronger because the right hand
arpeggiates the harmony suggested by the left hand. In measure 78, what seems to be a
lead in to the recapitulation, Mozart uses chromatic passing tones to emphasize the
dominant harmony that has the function of leading to the tonic harmony. In this section,
Mozart’s treatment of non-chords exaggerate the dominant harmony which has the
function of leading back to the original key.
In the recapitulation, the listener notices that Mozart treats P the same was as in
the exposition because they are identical. However, TR in the recapitulation has the
opposite function of TR in the exposition: not to modulate. Though, because Mozart
appropriately uses similar melodic material from the exposition, it is almost more
difficult to not modulate, thus the harmonic structure of this section is more sequential
than in TR in the exposition. Even more suspensions are used and more resolutions are
tonicized (such as in measures 91 and 92). After the crux in measure 96, the texture is
much more stable, as it were in the TR in the exposition, as Mozart writes few non-chord
tones and stands on the dominant.
Mozart makes a subtle but important distinction during S in the recapitulation that
differs from S in the exposition. In measure 103 (which corresponds with measure 23),
rather than putting static 8th notes in the bass, Mozart switches between tonic and
dominant harmony each eighth note. In the exposition, when their used to be so many
neighbor tones in this section, some of the neighbor tones are actually a part of the
harmony now, making the texture more stable. Perhaps because the recapitulation’s
function is partially to end the piece, Mozart is preparing for a stable ending. In measure
108, the texture once again becomes more unstable as the same strange harmonic
sequential structure comes back from the exposition. Mozart treats the rest of S in the
recapitulation the same as the exposition, however he precedes C in the recapitulation and
delays the EEC with a vii diminished 4/3 of i chord and a vii diminished 4/2 chord of V
followed by a V chord that cadences to i in measure 129.
Mozart’s emphasis on non-chord tones is clear from the beginning of this Sonata
as he begins a tritone away from the tonic. Throughout the entire piece he develops his
treatment of them so as to exaggerate and categorize certain formal functions.