MUSA221 Analysis Assignment
György Ligeti (1923-2006) – ‘Fanfares’, No.4 of Études for Piano, Book 1 (1985)
Fanfares is a relatively complicated and difficult piece to play. Fanfares uses clear ostinato throughout which is a group of 3+2+3 quavers playing a scale from C to B. Looking at the score, the first four notes appears like a C major scale while the later four notes, with F, G and A raised, looks like a B major scale. Every 1st, 4th and 6th note of the ostinato is accented and Ligeti instructed on the first page stating that the ostinato should be obviously accented throughout, however, the first beat of the bar should not be accented any more than the rest. Ligeti also has a clear instruction that the ostinato should stay in the background throughout the piece. On top of the ostinato, the other hand plays double notes/chords that are out of the scale notes and also leaps, moving in either contrary or oblique motion. Dynamics wise, the ostinato part plays at p or softer with some extreme use dynamics, for examples, pppppppp in bar 170; fff to pppp in bar 201-202. This is certainly unusual even in contemporary music due to impracticability. Thus, this almost has to be conceptual than definite as it is nearly impossible to play at this level of quietness.
Short rhythmic motifs are used on top of the ostinato. From bar 2-45, the motifs consists only crotchets and dotted crotchets, with every first note accented and some notes marked tenuto. Ligeti has made clear instructions to create an effect of every accented note is the beginning of a bar. Although the rhythms are just a group of 3+2+3 quavers and rests with bar lines added, but actually they can be grouped into three different rhythmic patterns/motifs, each one consists of 4 notes and (1 rest).
The first motif: ♩. ♩ ♩. ♩. (♩)
The second motif: ♩. ♩. ♩ ♩. (♩.)
The third motif: ♩ ♩. ♩. ♩ (♩.)
As shown above in the first motif, the 2nd and the rest are crotchets; in the second motif, there is only one crotchet in the middle (3rd note); the motif pattern, the 1st and 4th notes are crotchets. Thus, each note ‘takes turn’ to play crotchet in each pattern without crossing-over. These patterns appears occasionally in different order with variations, i.e. bar 63-86. The motifs have some characters of isorhythm which it will realign at the first beat of the bar every now and then, for instance, bar 1, bar 7, bar 12, bar 22, and so on. On the ‘quavers’ part of the piece, i.e. bar 46-62, bar 116-165, there is a motif of accentuation – every 1st, 4th and 6th quaver is accented which is identical to the ostinato. In the case of three quavers and two crotchets in bar 116, breaking down the crotchets to quavers will give the same results, but instead of having a scale of eight quavers (ostinato), it is grouped in seven quavers. Again, this acts a little like an isorhythm because it is a group of seven against a group of eight, thus, they will align on the first beat in some parts. The piece does not have a clear pattern harmonically, but looking at bar 2-32, it uses a wide range of chords, almost every chord is used ranging from C to Bbm7.
There are some polyrhythms starting from the middle of the piece. In bar 97 and bar 105, it is shown that the right hand does not follow the pattern of 3+2+3 but instead it plays in four crotchets. Similar to bar 106, right hand plays in 3+3+2, etc. In order to create a balance between polyrhythms and ostinato, Ligeti stated earlier on the first page that “do not accentuate the first beat of the bar any more than the subdivisions”. There are some extreme dynamics interchange between both hands as well, for example in bar 127, ostinato is in p while left hand plays in f, and immediately the next bar right hand plays in f and left hand plays in p. The terms una corda (the soft pedal) and tre corde (release soft pedal) appear on the second half the score for many times. Instead of serving its original purpose, its main function could be giving colours and varieties to the tones. The terms sempre legato and quasi senza pedale are stated on the first bar of the piece. This is likely to keep the piece clean and clear without blurring the ostinato part by not using the sustaining pedal.
When Stravinsky was asked what the purpose of ostinato is, he responded that it is a contradiction to development (Stravinsky & Craft, 1959). In fanfares, the ‘contradicting’ character of ostinato does not stop the piece to develop, instead this character establishes and expands the piece in a unique way. Ostinato appears at every bar in this piece, however, it does not sound repetitive at all. In some parts it is even nearly inaudible and hidden especially when the other hand is playing in quavers, i.e. bar 141-143, the repeated pattern blends in so well with the other hand. On top of that, the ostinato has its ‘solo moments’ during gaps, i.e. bar 73-74, bar 114-115. Near the end of the piece there are also some parts where both hands are playing the ostinato, usually after the ‘chaos’, for instance in bar 137-138, it acts almost like a reminder to the audience. Ligeti is very skilful in using ostinatos. The ostinato does not stay exactly the same, the octave it plays in changes all the time, the lowest starting with C1 and the highest starting with C7, in addition to that, the hand that plays the ostinato switches throughout as well. These small changes, including dynamics, have made a huge difference to the timbre and texture. Although the piece is given instruction of molto ritmoco, Ligeti has successfully created the feeling of irregularity while maintaining the strong rhythms by using accents – there is no sense of ‘bar lines’. As discussed above, he also made use of the motif of accentuations and different number of quavers in a group to create an effect of isorhythm which again has contributed variations to the piece.
Johann Pachelbel (1653-1706) – Canon in D for 3 violins and bass continuo (1680s)
A canon is a contrapuntal compositional technique and a polyphonic device which the original melody is imitated at a particularised time duration by one or more parts. Canon in D is a continuous loop where three violins play a canon on top of the ground bass, which is played by the basso continuo. Ground bass is a form of ostinato where the bass line is constantly repeated as the ‘ground’ of the variations and in this case, a group of eight crotchets repeated twenty-eight times until the end of the piece.
Ground bass progression in Canon in D: D – A – B – F# – G – D – G – A
Roman numerals: I – V – VI – III – IV – I – IV – V
The ground bass provides not only a melody line but also gives harmonic functions to the canon on top. This is supported by the canon on top since the notes played are always within the chord range, i.e. the notes are D, F#, A with E and G being the upper neighbour notes in bar 31. The harmonic progression can be seen as the descending 5-6 sequence in root position variant. Since the ground bass remains throughout, the harmonic progression of the whole piece stays the same throughout as well.
Harmonic progression: D – A – Bm – F#m/D – G – D – G – A
Roman numerals: I – V – vi – iii/I6 – IV – I – IV – V
After the initial statement of the ground bass, the canon in 3 starts coming in: the first violin comes in on bar 3; the second violin comes in on bar 5; and the third violin comes in on the bar 7 playing the exact same melody, rhythm, articulations and dynamics. The first violin is always the ‘leader’ while the other two imitate the notes with 2 and 4 bars delayed accordingly. Although the instruments repeat each other literally, they never clash due to the choice of notes and rhythm that Pachelbel used. Looking at the canon, it can be grouped into twelve variations, each variation lasts around four bars. For examples variation one (bar 3-6) plays in crotchets, variation five (bar 19-22) plays demisemiquavers in scale, variation seven (bar 27-30) plays semiquavers with upper neighbour embellishing tones. These variations have added elements of chaconne to the piece where variations are created on top of the ground bass.
“Canon – the strictest type of imitation – has such a wide variety of possibilities” (Davidian, 2015). Canon in D is a relatively simple piece, with three violins playing the literally identical melodies one after another and the basso continuo playing an ostinato but yet, it does not sound boring at all and is one of the most well-known piece. By combining these two techniques together, it gives an impression of simple and easy to approach, for example, a player can spend the littlest practice time to play a great-sounding piece. Its repetition and simple structure have also definitely made it easy to remember. The ideas of canon and ground bass seem very restricted when put together, however, it also allows player to “improvise” within the frame including using different instruments, change around the order of variations, changes in ornamentations and many more, which explains the numerous versions of this piece out there. Pachelbel made very good use of the techniques and composed the melody lines really wisely as they never clash and they always form a chord when they meet each other.
Both works discussed above uses ostinato but in different ways. Canon in D uses ground bass which is popular in late renaissance and baroque period. It has a clear ‘head motif’ with the other two instruments repeating exactly in canon form. The piece is constructed in a simple 4/4 time signature where the bassline just repeats over and over again with canon in 3 going on top in identical repetition. The ostinato remains obvious and clear throughout the piece. The harmony of the piece remains the same progression throughout since the ground bass determines the chord. This piece uses a very simple idea of ostinato and canon but yet it became the most well-known baroque composition because of the relatively pleasing melody and harmony. On the other hand, Fanfares’ ostinato is more popular in the 20th century where it is fluid and it functions less like a bass but it still provides note to the chord. The motif is not as definite as I only found a rhythmic pattern here. This piece is more complex as it has a few different elements working with the ostinato including polyrhythms and isorhythms, it is also written in the time signature of 3+2+3/8. Instead of exact repetition, the ostinato varies in octaves. On top of ostinato, the piece also uses rhythmic and accentuation motifs which blends in with ostinato in some parts, creating the effect of ‘hidden’ ostinato. In contrast to the baroque Canon in D, this piece uses the idea of repetition in a more experimental way where it sounds a lot more free and difficult.
I personally do not think there is a ‘better’ way of using repetition in music. In these two pieces, I like how Pachelbel is very smart when using repetitions in a way that it is efficient and effective, but it requires great skills to make the combination of canon and ostinato work as well. I also really appreciate Ligeti’s way of looping procedures where the ostinato does not sound like a loop when combined with other elements. I could not spot any disadvantage in using these repetitions, but I am very fascinated by Ligeti’s way of using ostinato. Both composers have used the looping elements very well, one being literal with repetition while maintaining the quality and another being adventurous in expanding the element to its full potential.
References
Davidian, T. (2015). Tonal Counterpoint for the 21st-Century Musician: An Introduction. Lanham and London: Rowman and Littlefield.
Stravinsky, I & Craft, R. (1959). Conversations with Igor Stravinsky (pp. 42). London, England: Faber.