I thought I'd revisit the piece tonight and provide a little more advanced, but not deep, commentary on the composition. It would help if you could read music or understand some basic music theory, but it's not necessary.
This prelude is in E major, and it evokes the sound of bells, a frequent theme and subject of Rachmaninov. E major is considered a very bright and majestic key. It's interesting to remember that different instruments, historical and modern could only play in certain ranges and keys, and also that tuning was not always done to equal temperament. In fact even today, for instance, strings tune by ear to perfect intervals rather than equal temperament. The frequencies of all the notes are also different of course, and this all contributes to keys being associated with certain "personalities."
A feature of Romantic music, and especially Rachmaninov, is the prominent use of scales, both diatonic and chromatic. This prelude is full of ascending and descending scales and rising and falling passages. For example:
Now it is a general principle of orchestration and composition, when you want to crescendo or accent, to add more notes and instruments. This is a "natural" way of adding loudness as opposed to an "artificial" way which is to just play louder. Consider the following passage. Why did Rachmaninov write it the way he did?
In blue, I circled the main melodic lines in the left hand. With red circles I designated the beats when extra notes were added in addition to the main melodic line, and in green I circled the 4 note rhythmic theme. You can clearly see a reason and pattern to the extra harmonic notes. This kind of advanced compositional technique is a feature strictly of the later Romantic period.
The topics in this post were kind of arcane, but I hope you enjoyed it.
Nice work. Rachmaninov is my absolute favorite composer. I'd love to see some analysis of the last movement (allegro scherzando) of his Piano Concerto #2. That's the section that sounds almost 'Lawrence of Arabia-esque" right?
Nice initiative and effort but some of the statements you made are quite "debateable."
"In fact even today, for instance, strings tune by ear to perfect intervals rather than equal temperament."
Not always. String players sometimes use other tuning systems depending on situation.
"A feature of Romantic music, and especially Rachmaninov, is the prominent use of scales, both diatonic and chromatic."
I wouldn't say Rachmaninoff uses different scales any more prominently than most romantic composers. Better examples would be Debussy, Ravel (if we decide to include them), Wagner, and Mahler.
"You can clearly see a reason and pattern to the extra harmonic notes. This kind of advanced compositional technique is a feature strictly of the later Romantic period."
Quite a bold claim. I don't think finding a counter-example would be too difficult.
On the other hand, note the notes played by left hand thumb on the last excerpt. It seems to mimic the four-note theme, albeit in syncopation and augmented.
Of course, there is so much depth to be analyzed in any of the famous composer's works; we've only scratched the surface here, to be sure.
On February 06 2012 17:18 phosphorylation wrote: Nice initiative and effort but some of the statements you made are quite "debateable."
"In fact even today, for instance, strings tune by ear to perfect intervals rather than equal temperament."
Not always. String players sometimes use other tuning systems depending on situation.
"A feature of Romantic music, and especially Rachmaninov, is the prominent use of scales, both diatonic and chromatic."
I wouldn't say Rachmaninoff uses different scales any more prominently than most romantic composers. Better examples would be Debussy, Ravel (if we decide to include them), Wagner, and Mahler.
"You can clearly see a reason and pattern to the extra harmonic notes. This kind of advanced compositional technique is a feature strictly of the later Romantic period."
Quite a bold claim. I don't think finding a counter-example would be too difficult.
On the other hand, note the notes played by left hand thumb on the last excerpt. It seems to mimic the four-note theme, albeit in syncopation and augmented.
Of course, there is so much depth to be analyzed in any of the famous composer's works; we've only scratched the surface here, to be sure.
You should analyze the Rach 3 next
i dont agree with the claim either. strictly of later romantic period? i think it goes back all the way to early baroque and renaissance, maybe earlier, though their rules and form were much different. though rachmaninoff i think was more influenced by more recent and closer composers such like chopin, liszt, and the five.
On February 06 2012 17:18 phosphorylation wrote: Nice initiative and effort but some of the statements you made are quite "debateable."
"In fact even today, for instance, strings tune by ear to perfect intervals rather than equal temperament."
Not always. String players sometimes use other tuning systems depending on situation.
"A feature of Romantic music, and especially Rachmaninov, is the prominent use of scales, both diatonic and chromatic."
I wouldn't say Rachmaninoff uses different scales any more prominently than most romantic composers. Better examples would be Debussy, Ravel (if we decide to include them), Wagner, and Mahler.
"You can clearly see a reason and pattern to the extra harmonic notes. This kind of advanced compositional technique is a feature strictly of the later Romantic period."
Quite a bold claim. I don't think finding a counter-example would be too difficult.
On the other hand, note the notes played by left hand thumb on the last excerpt. It seems to mimic the four-note theme, albeit in syncopation and augmented.
Of course, there is so much depth to be analyzed in any of the famous composer's works; we've only scratched the surface here, to be sure.
You should analyze the Rach 3 next
Essentially what I wanted to say... has been said already. Still, good to see fellow TLers attempt to dive deeper into the music.
Well, I have nothing to add but to say that I like these kinds of posts. Thank you. And I appreciate that I can follow the score in the video. It's helpful.
I think that you'll find that the way composers write for solo piano reflects the way they write for full orchestra. Rachmaninov's works in particular are incredibly orchestral, he being both a master pianist and composer.
I will consider blogging about the concertos next, by request. The concertos, being quite lengthy, are naturally harder to discuss, but we'll see.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd150/forelmashi/r-1.gif)
![[image loading]](http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd150/forelmashi/r-2.gif)
