Rossini: Petite esse solennelle

Analyzing the intro of the Kyrie....azh! Rossini

8 bars of introduction and I am on my knees:

Bar 1 I

Bar 2 I I6 IV V4->3

Bar 3 I I6 IV56 V4->3/VI (Modulation to E minor)

Bar 4 VI=I (E minor) I6 II56 V4->3 (which resolves on E major and to be precise E7)

Bar 5 V/ VII34 ? VIDE of F major

Bar 6 V46 .... V of A minor V7
Bar 7 I

Bar 8 V [46 54->3 (7)

Bar 9 Finally I

Especially from bar 5 onwards, I lose the tonal functions. Where is it? At bar 5, is it a passing Bb7? What do you think?

etc. etc. all in original version, with two pf and harmonium

Open content (youtube)

Open content (youtube)

Open content (youtube)

AbateFaria wrote:

Especially from 5 onwards, I lose the tonal functions. Where is it? At measure 5, it's a passing Bb7. What do you think?

Don't ask me

Boesendorfer wrote:

etc. etc. all in the original version, with two pianos and harmonium

Do you think these are valuable recordings? I don't know the performers.

AbateFaria wrote:

Analyzing the intro of the Kyrie....azh! Rossini

8 bars of introduction and I am on my knees:

Bar 1 I

Bar 2 I I6 IV V4->3

Bar 3 I I6 IV56 V4->3/VI (Modulation to E minor)

Bar 4 VI=I (E minor) I6 II56 V4->3 (which resolves on E major and to be precise E7)

Bar 5 V/ VII34 ? VIDE of F major

Bar 6 V46 .... V of A minor V7

Bar 7 I

Bar 8 V [46 54->3 (7)

Bar 9 Finally I

Especially from bar 5 onwards, I lose the tonal functions. Where is it? At bar 5, it's a passing Bb7. What do you think?

in my opinion:

measure 5:

1 - E7 (V7 of Amin in the harmonic minor scale, not natural minor)

2 - G#dim7 (vii°7 of Amin in the harmonic minor scale)

3 - Bb7 - this is actually the most "strange" one, in the sense of being foreign - I interpret it like this: G#dim7 = Ddim7 (vii of Eb minor (always in harmonic minor) which has Bb7 as its proper V)

4 - C#7 (supergulp!) it is effectively the hierarchy of F, but it would be more logical if it resolved on F#, instead at bar 6 there is exactly F. I would therefore try once again to see it in terms of the harmonic minor scale: G#dim7 = Fdim7 (vii of F#min (always in harmonic minor) which has C#7 as its proper V! And the F that's involved? simply it is the VI of Amin...

A which is followed by the V7 etc etc...

This is at least how I would have understood it (barring any oversights) if I had had to write it myself. In general, however, there can be many interpretations in the analysis of a piece and it's not always easy to understand where the author started from. In this case though... maybe Rossini had quite a drink ;)

Aside from measure 5, everything seems very clear to me. It modulates to E major, a progression that leads to E minor even though it resolves in measure 5 on E7. The last chord of measure 5 is a German sixth of F major.

The two central chords of measure 5 remain, which are practically a double chromatic passing motion.

Rather than having been drunk, Rossini is a great musician: harmonic instability with few means at his disposal ... proportioning it all to what we could do today ...

... (too bad we seem more drunk than him)

Zazza wrote:

Aside from measure 5, everything seems very clear to me. It modulates to E major, a progression that leads to E minor even though it resolves in measure 5 on E7. The last chord of measure 5 is a German sixth of F major.

The two central chords of measure 5 remain, which are practically a double passing chromaticism.

Rather than having been drunk, Rossini is a great musician: harmonic instability with few means at his disposal ... proportioning everything to what we could do today ...

... (it's a pity that we seem more drunk than he was )

.... it's just that always using "passing chromaticism" is a bit of making life easy for oneself.....

Looking at what comes before and after as well, the harmony used here is precisely that of an A harmonic minor (and this regardless of whether it was done intentionally or not - and I believe it was, precisely because we are talking about a great musician )

Then the C#7 could also be a German sixth (which however has its own type of usage that I don't hear here - a German sixth that is felt:

from 5'35'' )

or simply a C#7....

I mean, if there are other possible explanations for a phenomenon, why not take them into consideration? At worst, one learns something new (even by making mistakes, obviously ).

Open content (youtube)

I understand Bianca, but a German sixth going to an chord in second inversion .. it sounds clear as day

Besides, the sixth degree of F minor is also major, so it results in a "banal" tonicization. In my opinion, what's interesting instead is leaving it suspended without resolving it. In fact Abate, this is exactly the case for writing I46... because V46 would go to V35... which doesn't arrive. So it is truly a clean F major tonic in second inversion

I would also add that it is preceded by an Italian sixth (German without the fifth)... so as I was saying, it is likely they thought of it as a German one. And it is also the most obvious thing. But since Abate expressed a doubt... In my opinion, the context before and after also authorizes it: the Bm7b5 (bar 2), the Dm7 (bar 3), the F#m7b5 (bar 4) and the diminished seventh chords (before and after bar 5) are all part of the A harmonic minor scale (including the F): hence the "alternative" interpretation. Unless it is wrong (which could also be the case), why not consider it? Harmony can be used in many ways, and that is what makes it beautiful. So why not try it?
I remember once in college I proposed an alternative way to prove the Pythagorean theorem: the method and the proof worked, but I was challenged on the fact that the proof could not be proposed because it was a non "traditional" way of proving the "most traditional" of theorems.

Bianca wrote:

from which the "alternative" interpretation comes. Unless it is wrong (which could also be the case), why not consider it? Harmony can be used in many ways, and that is what makes it beautiful. So why not try it?

On one hand it is true, but in my opinion we must take into account what Rossini could have known and what compositional methodologies he had at his disposal. Practically only tonality... so everything, whether willing or not, takes its cues from this.

An alternative is possible today because much has changed over time and today a composer can express themselves within tonality even with paths that do not necessarily fit into nineteenth-century patterns.

Therefore, the tonal pivots must be sought out... and the rest is what lies in between.