Piano Sonata No. 3 -- a flummoxing cadenza?

[euphony131]

LvB's piano sonata no. 3 has in the middle of its coda (1st mvt) what's considered a "cadenza." The section as played by Igor Levit (great version btw) starts here at 8:25 until 8:50 (when the 1st theme returns):

What confuses me is why that particular sliver is considered a "cadenza." How can a solo work contain one? A cadenza by definition is when the soloist gets to show off. So one could easily say the whole mvt (if not the whole work) is one big cadenza, no? Any clarification greatly appreciated!

BTW, I understand this sonata is thought of as Beethoven's FIRST true virtuosic work.

[Chris]

A cadenza doesn't have to be a solo in an ensemble work. It can be a solo in a solo work too! The reason this is a cadenza is not just that it is a solo or that it is a virtuosic passage, but that it is rhythmically free - if you look at the score you will see that this section is not divided up into measures. It has the character of an improvisation, even though it is written out.

[euphony131]

The reason this is a cadenza is not just that it is a solo or that it is a virtuosic passage, but that it is rhythmically free - if you look at the score you will see that this section is not divided up into measures. It has the character of an improvisation, even though it is written out.

Chris, I'm not sure if I understand "rhythmically free." You mean because of the lack of bars that means it's playable at whatever speed/style one wants? But then aren't LvB's cadenzas for piano concertos written with bars, and yet they qualify as "cadenzas." Again, the definition of cadenza seems rather loose.

Btw, in the liner notes to Igor's set, it's written that the first part (or intro?) to Theme 2 is taken from LvB's piano quartet from 1780's. It's described as a "relaxed G minor melody" which "precedes the second subject and that creates a counterweight to the physical dynamism of all that has gone before it." I believe that melody starts at 1:15 and ends at 1:32 (if I'm not mistaken!) in the above video. Chris, I wondered if you knew which piano quartet they are talking about? Cheers!

[Chris]

Chris, I'm not sure if I understand "rhythmically free." You mean because of the lack of bars that means it's playable at whatever speed/style one wants? But then aren't LvB's cadenzas for piano concertos written with bars, and yet they qualify as "cadenzas." Again, the definition of cadenza seems rather loose.

Which of the piano concerto cadenzas are you thinking of? They are generally written without bars. Look for example at the cadenza passages at the very beginning of the "Emperor" - there are no bar lines there.

I'm sure there are cadenzas written with bar lines somewhere, but they would still have a free and improvisatory character.

Btw, in the liner notes to Igor's set, it's written that the first part (or intro?) to Theme 2 is taken from LvB's piano quartet from 1780's. It's described as a "relaxed G minor melody" which "precedes the second subject and that creates a counterweight to the physical dynamism of all that has gone before it." I believe that melody starts at 1:15 and ends at 1:32 (if I'm not mistaken!) in the above video. Chris, I wondered if you knew which piano quartet they are talking about? Cheers!

No, it starts at 0:40 in your video. It's from the Piano Quartet in C major, WoO 36, No. 3, first movement. Check 1:08 in this video of the piece:

Beethoven also reused the main theme of the slow movement of this quartet in the Adagio of Op. 2, No. 1.

[euphony131]

No, it starts at 0:40 in your video. It's from the Piano Quartet in C major, WoO 36, No. 3, first movement. Check 1:08 in this video of the piece:

Beethoven also reused the main theme of the slow movement of this quartet in the Adagio of Op. 2, No. 1.

Thanks, Chris. I absolutely can hear the similarity now. What would that melody (motif? theme?) be called in the context of the sonata? A Transition? I didn't expect it so early after reading the liner note description.

I did not know that none of his cadenzas had bars. So it's safe to say one can throw out the metronome when practicing those parts?

This sonata seems to be where Beethoven really comes into his own. The extreme in dynamics, the "improvisatory" nature, the assertive power, that long coda, etc. And that slow mvt has such profound melancholy and tender yearning about it. I feel like all the seeds of where he'd go are here. It's interesting that it's No. 3 since his Sympony 3 would set a new precedent. I wonder what other 3's of his are trail-blazers? It's like he needed to knock out two as warm up to something huge?

PS: I'll need to go back and hear the slow mvt theme of the quartet in Sonata 2. Cheers!
PPS: I recently got Igor's complete cycle and plan to listen to all 32 in order; something I've never done.

[Chris]

Thanks, Chris. I absolutely can hear the similarity now. What would that melody (motif? theme?) be called in the context of the sonata? A Transition? I didn't expect it so early after reading the liner note description.

I would call it the first part of the second theme. There don't just have to be two themes or melodies in sonata form - there can be groups of them in each part.

I did not know that none of his cadenzas had bars. So it's safe to say one can throw out the metronome when practicing those parts?

I would

[Peter]

It's interesting that it's No. 3 since his Sympony 3 would set a new precedent. I wonder what other 3's of his are trail-blazers? It's like he needed to knock out two as warm up to something huge?

Well Op.1/3 is also the finest of the set and apparently provoked an argument with Haydn over publication.

[euphony131]

I would call it the first part of the second theme. There don't just have to be two themes or melodies in sonata form - there can be groups of them in each part.

But what differentiates one theme group (comprised of many themes) from another? Is it the key it's played in? As a listener I would generally note where the mood/feeling changes, and assume it's a new theme group. And yet within groups I've noticed many different "moods." Like the section before the G minor melody is presumably Theme Group A (or 1st Subject) and yet there is a big difference between the stately charm that starts the piece and the wild runs that kick off at 20 seconds in. So these strict divisions between 1st Subject and 2nd Subject seem almost arbitrary.

[Chris]

But what differentiates one theme group (comprised of many themes) from another? Is it the key it's played in? As a listener I would generally note where the mood/feeling changes, and assume it's a new theme group. And yet within groups I've noticed many different "moods." Like the section before the G minor melody is presumably Theme Group A (or 1st Subject) and yet there is a big difference between the stately charm that starts the piece and the wild runs that kick off at 20 seconds in. So these strict divisions between 1st Subject and 2nd Subject seem almost arbitrary.

It's not arbitrary, but it can be complex. And there may be more than one valid way to break it down and label the parts of the structure. This is also true, for example, of how chords relate to one another - there is often more than one way to think about it when you are doing the analysis. The thing to remember is that these are just tools for thinking about music, not rigid boxes that you start from and then force the music into. Whatever technical definition we might give to sonata form, many pieces will deviate from it a little or realize it only imperfectly or could be interpreted in more than one way.

[euphony131]

It's not arbitrary, but it can be complex.

Yes, it can be confounding (especially for a layperson). I'll refrain from getting too over my head. haha! But I'm curious: is an A section entirely in one key and the B section entirely in another key? Is that perhaps one simple way of looking at it? Cheers.

PS: I wonder how much LvB consciously thought of form while composing -- randomly sketching in notebooks and such. I think I'd read that the melody or theme or motifs came to him first and then it's a matter of organizing them. He must've had an insanely brilliant organizational ability.

[Caters]

It's not arbitrary, but it can be complex. And there may be more than one valid way to break it down and label the parts of the structure. This is also true, for example, of how chords relate to one another - there is often more than one way to think about it when you are doing the analysis. The thing to remember is that these are just tools for thinking about music, not rigid boxes that you start from and then force the music into. Whatever technical definition we might give to sonata form, many pieces will deviate from it a little or realize it only imperfectly or could be interpreted in more than one way.

Yep, like take for example the Pathetique Sonata First Movement. And in particular, the Eb minor section with the hand crossing. I've seen many people label the Eb minor section as a long transition, but that doesn't sound right, it sounds like too long and significant of an area to simply be called a transition. On the other hand, calling the entire Eb minor passage followed by the Eb major passage simply Theme 2, which I have also seen people do, also doesn't sound right as there is significant contrast in mood, motives, and technique(Alberti bass in contrary motion in the Eb major vs a more Waltz-like accompaniment in the Eb minor). I call the Eb minor Theme 2 and the Eb major Theme 3 in my own formal and harmonic analysis of the Pathetique Sonata here:

https://musescore.com/user/50070/scores/5705851

[Chris]

Yes, it can be confounding (especially for a layperson). I'll refrain from getting too over my head. haha! But I'm curious: is an A section entirely in one key and the B section entirely in another key? Is that perhaps one simple way of looking at it? Cheers.

Generally, yes. I can't think of any counterexamples off hand. If you had both theme groups in the same key you'd have a problem when it came to the recapitulation, because the recapitulation changes up the exposition by having the second theme group in the tonic key as well - if you started out with both in the same key, you would end up with a recapitulation that was exactly the same as the exposition, which wouldn't be that interesting.

[euphony131]

Yep, like take for example the Pathetique Sonata First Movement. And in particular, the Eb minor section with the hand crossing. I've seen many people label the Eb minor section as a long transition, but that doesn't sound right, it sounds like too long and significant of an area to simply be called a transition. On the other hand, calling the entire Eb minor passage followed by the Eb major passage simply Theme 2, which I have also seen people do, also doesn't sound right as there is significant contrast in mood, motives, and technique(Alberti bass in contrary motion in the Eb major vs a more Waltz-like accompaniment in the Eb minor). I call the Eb minor Theme 2 and the Eb major Theme 3 in my own formal and harmonic analysis of the Pathetique Sonata here:

https://musescore.com/user/50070/scores/5705851

Wow! I can see you've given many hours of study and reflection on the sonatas! Unfortunately, at a certain point the technical side feels like Quantum Physics to me, i.e., way over my head. I'm just a lowly lay-listener. Flunked out of Adult Beginner's Piano. LOL. But thank you for your contribution. I'm gonna review your post again when I get to the Pathetique.

[Caters]

Wow! I can see you've given many hours of study and reflection on the sonatas! Unfortunately, at a certain point the technical side feels like Quantum Physics to me, i.e., way over my head. I'm just a lowly lay-listener. Flunked out of Adult Beginner's Piano. LOL. But thank you for your contribution. I'm gonna review your post again when I get to the Pathetique.

Indeed I have. The Pathetique is one of my favorites.

[euphony131]

Generally, yes. I can't think of any counterexamples off hand. If you had both theme groups in the same key you'd have a problem when it came to the recapitulation.

Right, thanks!