Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Adult Beginners Forum Classical Sonata Analysis

Mendelssohn, Op. 102 No. 1

Score.

Does the rhythm in the accompaniment have a name? Either the RH alone (mp-BAH-ba mp-BAH) ("mp" are the rests), or the effect of both hands together: 1 e and a 2 AND. I can imagine a Latin band playing this, with percussion marking the different RH rhythm.

Mendelssohn, Op. 102 No. 1

The Mendelssohn Songs Without Words that I have looked at so far have a structure that might loosely be called ternary, or verse break verse. They can be split up into lines like a song, and go something like A A' B A (or A A' B A A'', or other variations like that.). That is, most of the lines of the song are broadly similar, except for a contrasting line in the middle. Also my Mendelssohn book says they (all?) have a matching intro and coda: X A A' B A X.

Greener, do you see or hear something like that structure in yours? I haven't sat down at a piano yet with the melody of this song to be able to tell what I find in it.

Mendelssohn, Op. 102 No. 1

OK, I've looked more closely at the score and see what you're seeing in it, Greener. Ignore my question in the preceding post about ternary form. Also from looking at another of the Songs Without Words I see that there isn't always a matching intro and coda X ... X. In A's and B's, could you say 102/1 is:

A A' T B A' B X

Where T = Transition, X = Coda, and the second A' is actually only half of the first A', but I didn't have a good shorthand way of saying that.

So in a way it's a dressed up form of AABAB, or maybe ABCBC if you prefer (leaving the coda off of the analysis momentarily).

The second half of A' is almost entirely the same as the second half of A, just a third higher, so these two phrases, A and A', are very closely aligned, and can be thought of as essentially the same line, but adjusted to end up at different notes.

[ETA: and given that A and A' are so much talmost alike, then the format ABCBC is misleading, and this is really a dressed up form of AABAB.]

Yes, learn just the notes fingering first and, maybe, the phrasing, then bring out the melody. Then add some dynamics. And get it perfect later.

And then...

Join it to another equally well perfected phrase.

Don't learn the whole piece and then go back and put the dynamics in. When you have the whole piece it's so frustrating having to focus on that little bit there when there's this other problem elsewhere. Meanwhile you're practising the whole thing and drumming the nondescript dynamics into your fingers...

There are advantages to analysing the piece first, listenening to recordings, following the score and audiating until you have the piece memorised, the way you learnt songs on the radio (assuming you did).

Then stop listening, go to the piano and start learning to play it.

It speeds up the learning process an enormous amount.

Mendelssohn, Op. 102 No. 1



Yes, similar but not exact. I would call it A A B A B X. X being the coda with no matching intro. This structure is based on where I had identified themes previously.

Mendelssohn, Op. 102 No. 1


Not that I'm aware of. The RH in M2 is used for the cowbell intro to Honky Tonk Woman.

The vast majority of the Songs are simple ternary form. The intro and (often matching) coda are not always present.

But it's also frustrating to have a phrase that has become reasonably facile to play, and then to have to go back to zero with learning the next phrase. (*) I don't know, I guess this is because I don't have experience with knowing that the process will work. I'm really astounded with the Clementi Sonatina at having been able to learn the whole development, and it feels like I know what I'm playing, and not just performing a brute force recollection. I think it will take me learning a lot more pieces practicing memorization for me to start to have confidence in the rhythm of the process, and confidence that out of the oh-so-incomplete initial steps, will come eventual mastery of the whole.

[(*) ETA: hmmm, this isn't really accurate, because that's still what it's like the way I'm doing it: I'm getting reasonably comfortable with one bit before going on to the next bit, it's just that I'm not going so far in what I'm mastering about that bit as you are recommending.]

And again, learn all the phrases, individually, with just the fingering. Then add dynamics etc. to all of them. But only when they're all how you want them put them together.

Once you put them together you can easily be tempted to leave a little imperfection when there's a bigger one later in the piece so you practise that little imperfection while you're improving the other bit and then that little imperfection becomes a sore thumb come the recording but your ear is numb to it in playing.

Learn all the phrases in order also, if you like, but then practise the hardest ones first.

Learning them out of sequence as isolated extracts keeps you from continuing on when you get to the end of the bit you're working on and playing the next bit with less care and gradually repeating the careless playing until it's ingrained.

I don't know if I can distinguish little imperfections from big imperfections. I can just identify "this is the aspect I'm working on right now" and work on that aspect. Then go on and work on another aspect.

Sometimes I'll think something is solid, and then later an imperfection will appear. I don't know quite what hidden flaw might have been in place in my initial learning from which that imperfection grows.

If playing with imperfections ingrained all of them with no hope of change, then it seems to me it would be impossible to learn anything, since for me at least nothing is perfect when I start it. Even a single chord may not be perfectly voiced, or at the right dynamic, or two chords in succession may not make the transition in the most efficient way needed to later speed them up, or make their relative dynamics correct, or have the right articulation. Etc. etc. etc. So in some sense I have to start with imperfections, and ignore some while I iron out others, and try to be on an upward spiral of improvement.

Or so it seems to me.

This conversation is sort of terrifying because it means that when I come to play it for the BIG recital, you will be able to hear everything wrong about how I've practiced it.

Mendelssohn, Op. 102 No. 1


The only point I would dispute is that Theme 1 starts again as a segue from M19. The melody is from M2 but the harmony is a little different and it has the extension from M9.

The melody from M9 rises by a second in M7 from M3/M20 and M8 rises a third from M4/M21.

Theme 2 is up a fourth in M25 from M12 and the melody begins its descent to the coda a measure early.

Then continue doing that. But divide the piece into more manageable sections and keep them separate until you're closer to the recording date.


Again, start with just the notes until they're the right ones. Then articulate them the way indicated in the score. Then add dynamics as indicated. Carry on as normal but keep the sections small and isolated.


What they're going to hear is where you're at with it at the time of recording.

Work on it the same as you're used to working if it makes you feel more comfortable. But with several small sections instead of one long piece you'll have a better chance of memorising it (you can still play it from the score - there are no page turns in this piece), you'll be able to focus more clearly on each little section and you'll most likely have a better end result.

Working for six minutes on each of six isolated three or four bar sections each day (there are 18 unique measures in this piece and nine duplicates) will do more than spending forty minutes a day on 27.

You'll do better at bringing out the melody in M15 if you work on just M15 before you start reading through M11-17, memorising it or not.

And don't put the big recital on a pedestal. Just do an honest job and be proud of where you are instead of frustrated at where you want to be. You did a fine job with the Satie, you'll do a fine job with this.

You're funny, PS88 . BTW, you've mentioned a few times -- I think I recall -- that your piece is supposedly among the easiest of the bunch. Well, it sure does not sound that way to me. I haven't looked at the score closely, but it must be tougher then my other piece, Op 102 no 6.

You were asking in the The Big Recital thread about how tough of challenge the various selections were for people. I believe I stated mine (at the time, op 102 no 6) was easy. And it is. A walk in park really compared to this one. No 1 on the other hand I would be more inclined to associate to a stroll up Mount Everest, and could indeed be the toughest I have ever learned. It sure seems to be starting out that way. I spent nearly an hour today, on one bar.

My goodness, I have my hands full with this one.



OK, I will go back to make sure all clear on this. I still need to get it all more secure in my brain, anyway, as suggested. So, this will be a good exercise.

Richard, thank you for the encouragement. I will add that to my thinking. I'm already thinking "slower". Now I will also add "smaller sections".

Greener, Magrath's Guide to Intermediate and Teaching Literature suggests that mine is among the easiest. I will have a look through and see what I think of any of the others, and why I myself think that this is easiest (out of a set of 48 hard pieces). One thing that makes it easier is the slow tempo. For example Op. 38 No. 4 is similar in style to my Op. 30 No. 3, but that one is Andante and mine is Adagio.

Mendelssohn, Op. 102/1


(Nearly an) hour on one measure suggests there's room for improvement in your practise method. It would preclude my working on many other pieces.

I decided to time myself, I don't normally.

I picked Measure 20 at random. I chose to include the last chord of M19.

I learnt (memorised) the LH quite quickly, less than half a minute.

I learnt the RH in about two minutes including coming up with a suitable rhythmic sentence.

I practised the first half of the measure, RH only, to 'I'm coming to get you' (I'm not the world's best lyricist). I used to use fruits for the rhythm, plum, plum for crotchets, cherry, cherry for quavers, apricot for triplets and huckleberry for semis. Now I just make up dumb (but suitably metred) sentences. I spent a couple of minutes on the bar, half a dozen reps plus thinking time between each to play it flawlessly in my head and also to consider the crescendo.

The second half I felt was easy enough not to need HS practise.

I started working HT to the line 'I'm going to the seaside, leaving in the morning' taking about two to four seconds per sixteenth note, I wasn't keeping time particulary (that's the beauty of the rhythmic sentence) just making sure I got the right notes on the right word. I used the score for the first few runs through but was free of it quite quickly. Once it clicked I got it up to or close to tempo in about ten minutes - faster than I'd play the menacing opening but slower than I'd play the climb down from M30. I spent about fifteen minutes total on this measure and a little over ten minutes on M23 directly underneath it on the page. I used 'eating in a snazzy little restaurant in London' to get the rhythm. I was done inside half an hour.

I'd already got up to M6 when I investigated the piece back in November so I had a bit of a head start.

How did you spend your (nearly an) hour?

Mendelssohn Op. 30 No. 3

Where should we start with this? I'd begin with what I think is the hardest section having read through the piece picking out just the melody in RH, M11.3.

Now the LH is a descent in quarter notes from E to F# on all the black keys except B. Now how would we go about memorising this? It's a tough one! I think just basic repetition might help.

Let's look at the RH. We start with G# and B over the octave E in LH. Hmm, how can we associate G# and B with E?

The melody steps up in RH from B to E using fingers 2, 3, 4 and 5. The second chord uses the lowest note in that phrase, F#, so 1 must be used for that and the chord thus uses 1-2-3. We must practise the move from the first to the second chord. The rest seems straightforward. Let's work on just that handful. Four chords in RH, four in LH, slightly offset. Take plenty of time to think where each finger's going to go before you make the change.

At the end of each repetition, or more pertinently before each subsequent repetition, play it mentally, consider how you want it to sound and play the section with your hands in your lap. Then play it slow enough to guarantee the right notes and consider how you did at the end. Do about seven to ten reps each day, thinking between each one, and getting them right. Then let sleep do its work. When you're comfortable with it, it may be a few minutes or a few days, look at the next section.

The second half of the phrase continues the octaves descending in LH. It shouldn't take long to get these into your head.

Apart from the last note every chord has 1-2 on C# and E leaving 3, 4 and 5 for the melody. Play and sing, 'we're going home tomorrow'. Add the LH when you're ready.

When you're ready to join these two sections add the crescendo at the same time. You'll need to decide how loud you're going to get, and how quickly, but you have a sforzando on the next chord. You can do this before you go on or when you've done all the other sections but do it before you start practising these bars every day. Consider that if you're not using the right dynamics, then you're practising the wrong ones!

If you put them together before the new year you're ahead of the schedule I gave you earlier. Practise this bit each day at the start of your practise session (or before you start on the rest of this piece). When you can play it from memory for five consecutive days before you reach for the score you can start practising it at the weekend only.

Mendelssohn, Op. 102/1



I suppose an hour was a bit of an exaggeration. I have a tendency to do that from time to time. The frustration is always in not getting it as quickly as I would like.

Suffice it to say, I did not spend my time as productively as you did. I was trying to take on a bit in the new section (I changed M14-M19 to start at M12.) M12 was tricky for me and seemed like a whole new pattern to the beginning. I then had a run along to M15 and these came a bit faster.

I have at least some familiarity with this next section now, which is a good start. I'm back now working on M1-M5 again, and pleased to report it is coming together (finally) quite nicely. I think I will be able to manage OK, with this piece afterall.

However, funny you mention. I am not keeping up as well now, with all my other pieces I am still trying to develop. More hours are needed in the day. Or, if I could only get rid of my day job.

I like the lyrical analogy twist and will give this a try.

Silly question, I get RH, LH. I don't get HT, HS. I see it all the time and thought it would eventually be obvious. But, still is not .

HT = Hamilton Tigercats? Half-Time?
HS = Harmonic System?

Hands separately and hands together!

Mendelssohn Op. 30 No. 3

Richard, thank you for this detailed look inside "how to memorize.". I'm going to comment point by point because I think it's interesting to compare how our minds work.


Interesting.  To me the hardest section is mm. 14-17 (perhaps because neither of my sources gives much fingering here, so it took me a while to work out fingering), and the RH chord transition from m. 21 to m. 22.


The LH here was easy for me to learn.  It's a descending scale starting from E; I just have to remember the A# (since we're transitioning into B major here). I don't learn well just from repetition; I need some pattern or understanding as the foundation for my remembering.


Rhetorical question, I hope!  It's an E major chord.


I'm using the fingering from the Kullak edition published by Peters, which is slightly different, but I don't find it difficult.  Slightly harder to remember the notes, but they make patterns on the keyboard which help me.


The idea of thinking out the fingering and motions without my hands on the keyboard is novel to me.  I should do more of playing extremely slowly for sure, being sure I've positioned my fingers correctly before playing each chord.  The suggestion for number of repetitions is interesting; I haven't been keeping track.  I haven't really got a track record to give personal testimony about the power of sleep, but I did consciously think last night at the end of my practicing (including other pieces) when I was considering going back and running through what I'd worked on, I thought "No, you've been through it, the next step is to sleep on it."


Yes, this was my experience.


Pretty much how I thought of it.    I also identified it as an F#7, which helped me remember the F# A# C# sequence, and then B is an intermediate note before the final A#.


Ah, dynamics.  Must.  Add.  Soon.  I still conceptualize this as "without dynamics" vs. "added dynamics", rather than "wrong" vs. "right.", so I don't yet really get "without dynamics" as ingraining the wrong thing.  Maybe with time I will start to feel the truth of what you say more viscerally.  Nevertheless, I will add dynamics tonight.

I have fingering memorized through m. 14, and have mm. 15-17 in progress.  From what you say I should take 15-17 in smaller chunks (although I have been building the phrase up in small pieces).  Will try that tonight, and also practice it in phrases (plus the first chord of the next phrase) layering in more things beyond fingering on the phrases up to m. 14).


I haven't been working to schedule because I don't trust that I can memorize any particular bit in any pre-specified amount of time.  I have had in mind that I'd like all the fingering memorized by the new year.

Do the five consecutive days have to elapse before starting on a new phrase?

I don't trust my memory enough to leave pieces so freshly memorized to weekends only.  Also it seems as if, once I have the notes memorized that I would want to start working on the other layers like dynamics and voicing.  Or are dynamics and voicing part of what you're working on on those five days?

I'm thinking of what keystring said about only being able to work on one thing at a time.  I hadn't felt that way before in a piece (my problems are more finding the notes fast enough), but in this piece I definitely feel that my brain is completely occupied just remembering the notes so far.

I did find that I could finally practice the sforzandos in mm. 13-14, but that is new, to have enough brain cycles to alot to that.  However I guess I'll start a five day cycle layering in voicing and dynamics etc. much sooner, on my mm. 15-17, and find out what that is like.

Thank you again for this detailed practicing write-up.

Oh, I didn't mention about the words for rhythms. I just count out the rhythms, 1 e and a, etc., and then practicing humming the piece to check out my continuous knowledge of the rhythms and the notes.

What would using the words add? Rhythm is one of my strong points, I think. Looking at or playing a rhythm I'm almost never unsure of how it should go (polyrhythms excepted, and I'll try words the next time I meet one of them).

+1
I always try to be quick to memorize as my reading is so poor, or at least extremely slow and not sufficient for playing much of the classical I am learning now once up to full tempo. Learning classical from a score is brand new to me as of last few months. What I am finding though, for memorization, it is just like you say here. Having a pattern to follow, or if not an obvious pattern, a method you can make up that will help you remember, is key.

Like ... oh yeah, in this section, I just move everything in my LH hand up one inversion, and then the RH plays the chord again in this inversion, and this same logic also applies in Mx, Mx, Mx.

A pattern or methodology for remembering what needs to happen next, always seems to emerge. Not immediately, but with more familiarity, it always seems to.

Not sure if helps, but it seems to be this way for me.