Opening to Brahms 1

Analysis of Brahms’ First Symphony, Bars 1-9

The beginning of this symphony is incredible.  A wash of sound, a constant heart beat in the low voices and timpani, full string section and full woodwinds.

Sitting down to do a harmonic analysis of the opening of this movement, Brahms’ habit of playing with the meter will also play with your mind as you try to figure out which notes in which voice belong to which chord.  Above you will see a reduction of the opening of this symphony.  It has three main ideas (doubled at the octave).  Line one is played by the violins and celli.  Line two belongs to flutes, oboes, clarinets, bassoons, Eb Horns (partially), and violas.  The pedal C (line three) is played by the timpani, contrabassoon and contrabass, and is also sustained by the C Horns.

The most important road block in analyzing this opening is lining up what the harmonic rhythm is and where the actual chords are.  The goal of the following section is to show how aligning line one over the harmonic rhythm established by line two can uncover the underlying harmonic progression in these nine bars. This can be accomplished by eliminating the second quarter note in the first bar of line one, and writing the part exactly as written.  To realign the parts at the end, extend the final Bb in measure 7 and the F natural in measure 8 by one eighth note each.  This looks like the figure below.

As you can see (and perhaps more clearly hear) this lines up the two parts almost perfectly, allowing for a harmonic progression that is clear to discern, and a regular harmonic rhythm.  The progression can be explained thusly (roman numerals reference the key of c minor):

Bar 1 : Beat 1 announces a unison c, implying i.  Beat 4 is a vii°/ii. The vii°/ii resolves to a

Bar 2 : II, which over the course of the bar and a quasi voice exchange leads to

Bar 3 : ii (the ultimate goal of the vii°/ii). Beat 4 is a vii° of the next chord which is

Bar 4 : a V7/E.  Using root motion by a third, this chord progresses to

Bar 5 : V

Bar 6 : i

Bar 7 : IV

Bar 8 : Beat 1 produces a dominant chord of the next harmony on beat 2, a V7/VII.  This chord is transformed on beat 7 by raising the root up a halfstep into a vii°/V.

Bar 9 : V.

When the piece is lined up this way, you do not find a single non-chord tone, except for a couple passing tones in the ascending stepwise sections, and the pedal C that drones throughout. 

Brahms, by offsetting line one, has created added even more tension in the first four bars (as if the progression there was not tense enough), and has added a bit of suspense to the seemingly plane V – i – IV turnaround in the middle of these bars.  This will also explain why there is a release of harmonic tension when the Ab moves to the G in bar five.

I hope that this little analysis provides a clearer picture of the opening of this great symphony.

Peter Mennin: a composer born from the Eastman tradition…

There is so much to say about this symphony, as it is filled with so many interesting elements, especially in terms of harmony and rhythm. But I feel like I’ve ramble on enough about this piece and want to move on to others.

So for my last post on Peter Mennin (at least until I study him again), I want to talk about where he belongs in the history of music. When historians and history books cover this era of music history, they tend to get tied up in the areas of atonality, serialism, chance music, minimalism, and so forth. However, Mennin fits in another camp, that of extended tonality, a continuation of what was going on before Schoenberg moved into the atonal realm.

As you have seen here, vertical harmonies might not always function the way we would expect, but horizontal lines are indicative of a key. These are elements of 20th century counterpoint, used by composers such as William Schuman, Bernard Rogers, and Howard Hanson.

I suppose you could say this area is sometimes avoided in history texts because it adds a whole new dimension to recent music history. Certainly Schumann, Rogers, Hanson, and their peers wrote for orchestra, but their names are most commonly associated with compositions for wind ensemble.

As the title of this post suggests, Mennin was born out of the Eastman tradition. He was at Eastman right before Frederick Fennell formed the Eastman Wind Ensemble, of which Hanson was a big supporter. Hanson composed several works for wind ensemble, a sound that belongs to what many college directors call “50s band music.” It is a distinct extended tonality that characterizes these works. Instrumental choirs were used independently and rarely mixed.

That being said, when I first heard Mennin’s Third Symphony, I instantly heard the sound of the wind ensemble in the orchestration and tonality. This stems from the sound that he inherited from his teachers. In flipping through Howard Hanson’s first two symphonies, what sticks out to me is his grouping of instrumental choirs, frequent use of brass for melodic material, and frequent meter shifts.

The characteristics of Mennin’s Third Symphony are very similar. And here, I am going to list the qualities of Mennin’s symphony that sets him apart from other symphonic composers:

• The use of counterpoint within tonal areas without much regard for vertical sonority.
  
• The use of asynchronous rhythms and metric pulses.
  
• The use of the orchestras choirs to present themes in whole, rarely blending woodwind and brass, or brass and string, etc.
  
• Minimal thematic material with lots of development.
  
• Ambiguous, yet fluid form.

Though Mennin’s symphonies belong to this camp of tonal (or at least tone centric) music, I hope in the future that these symphonies will get studied more frequently.

------------------------
Works Referenced

• Battisti, Frank L. The Winds of Change. Galesville: Meredith Music Publications, 2002.
  
• Hanson, Howard. Symphony No. 1. Boston: Carl Fischer Inc., 1923.
  
• Hanson, Howard. Symphony No. 2. New York: Carl Fischer Inc., 1932.
  
• Mennin, Peter. Symphony No. 3. New York: Hargail Music Press, 1948.

Rhythm and Meter in Mennin's Third Symphony

Let us move our discussion away from harmony and melodic devices and move into the area of rhythm and meter. Mennin creates a rather interesting rhythmic pallet in this piece and he plays around with implied meter constantly.
From the opening three bars, it is difficult to tell what the meter of the piece is aurally.


Example 1 – Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 1-3.


Example 2 – Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 1-3.

Unless you are familiar with the piece, these opening measures can be felt as two beats to the bar, putting the first dotted half note on a beat. The horns reinforce this implied meter until the timpani plays syncopated off the written meter in bar five. It really is not until just before the primary theme that we get the sense of three beats to the bar as the steady pulse.


Example 3 – Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 1-20.

The other rhythmic device that he uses frequently is that of motivic displacement. Mennin is different from other composers who play with rhythm and meter because he plays with his rhythmic motives within phrases.

First, take a look at the opening phrase generated by the motto theme. In this example, I have boxed off rhythmic motives that are displaced.


Example 4 – Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 4-11, violin.

As you can see here, the half notes are on the beat the first time through, but are felt off the beat in the second instance. This use of rhythmic motives allows for Mennin to create a sense that the material is unified and is all generated from the same source, yet also creates a sense of diversity and interests in his themes.

In this next example, Mennin combines both these ideas together to create a really clever primary theme. The opening of this theme recalls the metric ambiguity of the opening bars. Even though the 3/2 meter is firmly established now, there is a clear relationship between this measure and the rhythmic grouping of the opening phrase. Second, the use of motivic displacement has created another level of metric ambiguity. These opening bars are more naturally felt in a 4/2 pattern, putting a strong downbeat stress on beat two of the second bar of this phrase. This is marked in the example below.


Example 5 – Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 14-17, horn.

Notice how the same four-beat rhythmic motive is repeated here. Even though the pitch material is only remotely related, a strong four-beat figure is established on top of the dominant three-beat pulse. This metric ambiguity is heighted because the three-beat pulse is not emphasized during this passage in any form.

This leaves us with some interesting interpretation questions as a conductor. Do you emphasize the three-beat pulse when possible to heighted then metric conflict, or do you down play it to make the piece more fluid and take the edge off the theme? Should the ensemble play these “displaced downbeats” with the same emphasis as a downbeat, or should the syncopation be emphasized?

Since Mennin writes the piece in 3/2, I feel that the sycopated feel is very important to get across. The opening theme should be felt in three, giving a rather hard accent on the sycopated figure. In the primary theme, I would make sure the string pulse as clear as possible and put some weight to the pulse to emphasize the rhythmic complexity of the primary theme. The tenuto marks above the hlaf notes in the strings is a big ambiguous, but seems to suggest a pulsing figure.

This all plays very well into the idea that the primary theme is suposed to be lively and the second theme lyrical. Mennin acomplishes this through rhythm and meter in this symphony.

------------------------
Works Referenced

• Mennin, Peter. Symphony No. 3. New York: Hargail Music Press, 1948.
  
• Mennin, Peter. Symphony No. 3. The Seattle Symphony, conducted by Gerard Schwarz. Delos DE 3164, 1996. Compact disc.

Composer Speaks: W.A. Mozart on Peter Mennin’s Third Symphony

Let us step away from the analysis for a moment to talk about W.A. Mozart. Suppose for a minute that we are able to expose Mozart to Mennin’s Third Symphony. Then perhaps after the performance we are able to interview Mozart about the experience. What might that look like…

The following is a fictional account of an interview between a local music critic and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. The interview took place following the premier of Peter Mennin’s Third Symphony.

Reporter: Maestro, do you have time to answer a few questions after this concert?
W. A. Mozart: Well, I am in the middle of composing my greatest work... they are all great… but I don’t want to forget about my adoring fans.

Rep: Um… thank you Heir Mozart. First off, what is your opinion of the premiere you just heard?
WAM: It is nowhere near the level of my compositions. The use of counterpoint was all wrong. Too many dissonances. It almost sounded like parallel fourths in some passages… a huge problem! Also, his use of the orchestra is unheard of.
Rep: Can you explain?
WAM: Of course! He used instruments like the trombone in his symphony… a SYMPHONY! I use that instrument where it should be kept: the opera house. Same goes for the percussion and piccolo. Not only that, but the woodwinds and brass had solo sections, making the strings play accompaniment figures. The strings are the heart and soul of an orchestra and should always be the primary voice in a symphony. I do not think the two crummy themes were ever presented first in the strings… maybe once…

Rep: Why were the themes so “crummy?”
WAM: Wasn’t it obvious? I could not tell if they were in major or minor, nor in two or three. The second theme sounded like it had a few tritones in it. Also, that fanfare motive that opened the piece kept coming back like it was a rondo or something. Obviously it was an attempt at sonata form, but the fanfare kept coming back. And speaking of failed sonata form… did you hear that recap?

Rep: Yes I did. I had some trouble figuring out exactly when it started?
WAM: I’m not sure it started anywhere. I’m not sure what gets into composers these days. They change some keys around, repeat their themes and say that the form is complete. In my works, you can always tell when the recapitulation begins, but I think there were nearly three points of recap in this piece. It left me feeling very uncomfortable.

Rep: One last question. What were your feelings on the tempo change?
WAM: Was that written in? I just thought the conductor screwed it up?

Rep: No, the conductor told me about it in a pre-concert interview.
WAM: Well, I’m just going to have to write Mr. Mennin a letter and describe my surprise at such a ludicrous idea. You don’t put a tempo change in the middle of a piece like that. What does he think this is, an opera? Perhaps he tried to mark his development with these tempo changes.

Rep: I appreciate your thoughts on this performance maestro.
WAM: No problem, I love keeping my fans entertained.

Mennin: Harmonic Language in Symphony No. 3

Example 1 – Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, mm 1-3.

Lets talk about Mennin’s overall harmonic language in Symphony No. 3. This opening motive which ties the entire work together, encapsulates many of the elements of this symphony that Mennin expands upon throughout the entire work. So you will find I am going to frequently refer back to these three bars to discuss ideas that are found throughout the symphony.

A harmonic analysis of these opening measures yields the following chords.

Measure 1
Beat 1 – Open Fifth on F, inverted
Beat 2 – D 4/7 (quartal triad on D)
Beat 3 – AbM 6/4
Beat 4 – F 4/7 (quartal triad on F)
Measure 2
Beat 1 – GM


Example 2 – Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 1-3, meterless

On first glance at this analysis you might think that I am getting ready to show you how Mennin mixes traditional tertian harmony with quartal harmonic ideas that arose during the period of extended tonality.

However, as a music theorist, I am constantly asking myself, is this how I hear this passage? I will ask other trained musicians how they hear a passage that I am having difficulty understanding. Asking these questions and listening to this passage repeated lead me to a different conclusion.

Mennin’s harmonic language is influenced by his use of counterpoint. This entire opening passage is better understood as three separate lines moving contrapuntally towards a common goal, the dominant of c minor. The interval content between the voices is a mixture of perfect intervals and thirds and the pitch content can all be understood in a c minor context. This creates a sense of consonance where harmonic analysis might suggest something different.


Example 3 – Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 1-3, couterpoint analysis

This leads to an interesting question: If harmonies are largely non-functional, how are key areas determined?

Conclusions about tonal centers are largely based on the pitch content of thematic lines. For example, the primary theme (example 4) is initially stated in C minor.


Example 4 – Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 14-17.

I say C minor for three reasons. First, the initial and final pitches are C in this phrase. Second, the half step created by the Db generates voice leading tension that drives the line towards the C in the third measure. Lastly, the first four pitches set up a clear c minor feel (do-re-me-do). The E natural is felt as an upper chromatic neighbor between the two Ebs.


Example 5 – Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 33-37.

The secondary theme is identified as being in F minor. In bar three, the same figure from the primary theme is present (do-re-me-do). The opening two pitches set up a sol-do figure that is a strong indicator of tonality. The melody also frequently returns to F at strong structural points as an arrival pitch.
These ideas can be applied throughout the pieces to identify key area. Just like in the opening motive, the harmonies at cadence points and other structural markers are largely related to the key, analyzing the pitch center of thematic ideas is more reliable than going through and marking all the chords of the piece. These chords prove support for my melodic key analysis.

Throughout the analysis of the keys, I am less concerned with mode and more concerned with the centric pitch. Mennin likely shuffles through a few different modes throughout the piece, or inflects other modal ideas (certainly major and minor are interchanged frequently), but the centric pitch is the most interesting in terms of identifying the key scheme of the piece and understanding how the different areas relate.

------------------------
Works Referenced

• Mennin, Peter. Symphony No. 3. New York: Hargail Music Press, 1948.

Mennin's Use of the Orchestra in Symphony No. 3

I would like to spend just a moment discussing some of the ways Peter Mennin used orchestral color in this opening movement. The orchestra used in this piece takes a step back from the large orchestras of the turn of the century and is more like the orchestra found during the early romantic period. Pairs of winds (with addition of a piccolo), four horns, three trumpets, three trombones, and tuba makes up the wind section. The string section is standard use, though it frequently splits in to multiple parts. The percussion section is a slightly expanded from the timpani to include a snare, cymbal, and bass drum. This possibly takes influence from the music of his teachers and mirrors the use of percussion in the wind ensemble music of this time (more on extra-musical influence later).

Though the orchestra is conservative, considering Wagner, Mahler and others who came before him, Peter Mennin’s use of these instruments is very interesting and colorful. As previously discussed, Mennin sets up the piece with a motto theme in the trumpets and trombones. This theme comes back frequently throughout the work, but its return in the trumpets always heralds a significant structural event.


Example 1 - Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 1-3.

As stated before, Mennin frequently splits the strings into more than their five standard voices. The example below shows such a section. Mennin frequently uses strings only when working out larger sections of counterpoint.


Example 2 - Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 33-38.

Mennin is quite skillful at matching like timbres to get a certain effect. At the development section, Mennin combines the violins in a low octave with the horns and clarinets in the lower half of their range. These three voices are focused warm sounds that blend well in terms of register and tone color, yet each one contributes something unique to the sound for a very creative blend. There are fewer frequencies in the overtone series present in these instruments than perhaps in a flute or oboe timbre. This attention to instrumental blends is a characteristic of Mennin’s orchestration style.


Example 3 - Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 69-74.

Also shown in this example, Mennin frequently pairs a smooth melodic line with an equivalent line of shorter note values. In this example, horn 1, clarinets, and violins have the sustained melodic line while the viola and horn 3 play the same melody with shorter note values. This makes the first part of the note begin accented with a softer sustained sound when half the voices drop out.
Mennin uses the orchestral voices in different ways. In the next example, we see how he uses the instrumental choirs separately, giving the woodwinds different material from the strings.


Example 4 - Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 99-104.

In this next example from the recapitulation, Mennin shows his skill at mixing articulations and instrumental effects to vary repeated thematic material. It is used in this example not only to provide timbre variety, but also to help transition the thematic material from a melodic sustained horn sound to the more articulated timpani sound. The use of stopped horn notes has a very pointed articulation, just like sound created when a stick hits a drum.


Example 5 - Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 130-132, horn and timpani.

In this final example, Mennin keeps the trumpet voice separate from the rest of the instruments, referencing the motto theme at the beginning of the piece. He pairs the rest of the voices in terms of range.


Example 6 - Peter Mennin, Symphony No. 3, m. 164-169.

Other than these few examples, a good portion of this writing is more chamber like, blending individual wind instruments over a foundation of string timbre as seen in Example 3.

------------------------
Works Referenced

• Mennin, Peter. Symphony No. 3. New York: Hargail Music Press, 1948.

Peter Mennin's Third Symphony: Themes and Sonata Form

Below is a Slideshare presentation of the form found in the first movement of this work. I introduce the themes of the work and walk you through how they are developed throughout the piece. Slideshare is a flash based application. If you are unable to view the presentation, update to the latest version of flash.


*EDIT: at one point in the presentation I use the term rhythmic diminution. The correct phrase describing this section is rhythmic augmentation.
------------------------
Works Referenced

• Mennin, Peter. Symphony No. 3. New York: Hargail Music Press, 1948.
  
• Mennin, Peter. Symphony No. 3. The Seattle Symphony, conducted by Gerard Schwarz. Delos DE 3164, 1996. Compact disc.

Peter Mennin and His Symphonies

Peter Mennin (1923-1983) is an American composer with close ties to the Julliard School. His education includes a Bachelors, Masters, and Doctoral degree in music from the Eastman School of Music, studying with composers such as Howard Hanson and Bernard Rogers. At some point in discussing his symphony, I will make some connections with these composers and the works that characterize this period and area of the country.

Though his compositional education was done almost exclusively at Eastman, he is deeply tied to the Julliard school, where he taught form 1947 till 1958, and again from 1962 until his death in 1983. He returned in 1962, after gaining acclaim as the president of the Peabody Institute from 1958-1962.

He composed nine symphonies in all, having completed the first six by the age of thirty. All the administrative responsibilities seemed to have slowed down his creative process as it took over a decade to complete another symphony. In this decade, we can see a huge change in Mennin’s compositional style, having felt the influence of composers such as William Schuman. His music became less tonal and more complex in the style of counterpoint seen in composers of the twentieth century.

Below is a list of Mennin’s symphonies:¹

1941 – Symphony No. 1

Composed as a student of Normand Lockwood, score withdrawn

1944 – Symphony No.2

Composed while studying at Eastman, movement entitled “Symphonic Allegro” was performed by Bernstein and New York Philharmonic in 1945.

1946 – Symphony No.3

Doctoral Dissertation from Eastman School of Music

1948 – Symphony No.4 “The Cycle”

Includes SATB choir with a setting of three short philosophical texts.

1950 – Symphony No. 5

Commissioned by Dallas Symphony Orchestra, premiered by Walter Hendl.

1953 – Symphony No. 6

Commissioned by the Louisville Orchestra, premiered by Robert Whitney.

1963 – Symphony No. 7 “Variation Symphony”

Unlike his previous works, all composed in three movements, this work is set in one movement with five parts that resemble the parts of a five movement symphony. Premiered by George Szell and the Cleveland Orchestra.

1973 – Symphony No. 8

This work was premiered by Daniel Barenboim and the New York Philharmonic.

1981 – Symphony No. 9

Commissioned by the National Symphony Orchestra, returning to a three movement form, though compositional style is more like symphonies 7 and 8 than his earlier works.

------------------------
¹Neil Butterworth, The American Symphony, (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1998), 156-159.

------------------------
Works Referenced

• Butterworth, Neil. The American Symphony. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1998.
  
• Olmstead, Andrea. Julliard: A History. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1999.
  
• Simmons, Walter G. “Mennin, Peter.” Grove Music.

Introduction to Symphonic Lit: The Blog

The purpose of this blog is to explore creative ways at analyzing symphonic literature, blending traditional and progressive music theory methods, current trends in conducting studies, and utilizing the blog format to take some angles and perspectives not typically explored.

The initial posts will be considered my final project for the Symphonic Literature course I am currently taking. I will be doing an in depth look at Peter Mennin's Symphony No. 3. Beginning in December, this blog will expand to include all the symphonic and chamber works I study and analyze as part of my career preparation.

Expect to see form analyses, exploration of relationships between themes and motives, biographical information, and conducting concerns. I will utilize images, slidecasts, audio files, video files, and posts from fictional perspectives of other composers, theorists, and conductors. Any relevant quotes from the literature will also be shared.

Every piece discussed will be tagged, so you can sift through all the posts using the tag tool on the side of this page.