Chen, W. M. (2012) - An Analysis of Sonata Form in Clarinet Concertos by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Louis Spohr, and Carl Maria Von Weber (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Cincinnati) PDF
Chen, W. M. (2012) - An Analysis of Sonata Form in Clarinet Concertos by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Louis Spohr, and Carl Maria Von Weber (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Cincinnati) PDF
A document submitted to
2012
by
Wen-Mi Chen
Sonata Theory recognizes five types of sonatas based on their rotational designs. The first
movement) and is the most complicated sonata design due to the great variation that exists
among individual Type 5 movements. This document contains a brief introduction to Hepokoski
and Darcy’s Sonata Theory and a summary of the Type 5 sonata. Chapters two, three, and four
are extensive studies and analyses of the clarinet concertos composed by Wolfgang Amadeus
Mozart, Louis Spohr, and Carl Maria von Weber. Comprehensive comparisons of these
concertos are provided at the end of chapters three and four. Diagrams 2, 3, and 4 are the result
of examining these concerto movements. They indicate the sections, zones, and modules of a
sonata form in the movements. Appendix A is a list of terms and abbreviations that are used in
the analyses. In addition, Hepokoski and Darcy’s Type 5 sonata default settings and options are
included in Appendix B.
i
Copyright by
Wen-Mi Chen
2012
Acknowledgements
It would not have been possible for the completion of this document without the
Aufmann, and Dr. Samuel Ng for their profound knowledge, support, and guidance they showed
me throughout my research. To those who supported the efforts for this document: Shirley
Longstreet and Christine Pass—thank you for your advice, hard work, and dedication.
iii
Table of Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
iv
LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES
Example 2.1 R1:\P (mm. 1-8); R1:\S1 (mm. 25-31) and R1:\S2 (mm. 31-39) ............................. 19
Example 2.2 S1:\TR1.1, TR1.2, and TR1.3, is a case of sujet-libre transition (mm. 78-103) ......... 20
Example 2.3 Tri-Modular blocks (mm. 104-134) and Closing zone (mm. 134-140) within the S1
........................................................................................................................................... 22
Example 2.4 S2, reference of P theme (mm. 172-176) ................................................................ 24
v
Example 3.34 S2 module (mm. 184-205) .................................................................................... 79
Example 4.1 R1:\P0 (mm. 1-11); R1:\TR1.1 (mm. 26-33); and R1:\C (mm. 38-47) ..................... 89
Example 4.2 S1:\P1.1 (mm. 48-63) of Clarinet Concerto No. 1, Op. 73....................................... 90
Example 4.3 S1:\Ppreface (mm. 50-53) of Clarinet Concerto No. 2, Op. 74 .................................. 91
Example 4.4 Piano Concerto No. 2, Op. 32, Ppreface (mm. 43-56)................................................ 91
Example 4.5 TI within the S1 (mm. 74-83); last 10 measures of the 1st movement .................... 92
Example 4.6 S1:\P1.1 (mm. 48-55) and S theme (mm. 110-117).................................................. 93
Example 4.7 R2 (mm. 145-170)................................................................................................... 94
Example 4.8 Central action and RT within the S2, and S3 (mm. 217-252) ................................ 95
Example 4.9 Subtype C in Weber’s Clarinet Concerto No. 1, Op. 73, 1st movement ................. 98
Example 4.10 Subtype B in Weber’s Clarinet Concerto No.2, Op.74, 1st movement ............... 101
Example 4.11 R1:\P; R1:\TR1.2 (mm. 18-26); and R1:\S (mm. 30-39) ..................................... 102
Example 4.12 S1:\Ppreface (mm. 50-53) and Sujet Libre type of TR within the S1(mm. 85-92) 103
Example 4.13 S2 Episodic (mm. 151-167) ................................................................................ 105
Example 4.14 Central action (mm. 167-181); R1:\TR1 (mm. 14-15); RT (mm. 181-183)........ 106
Example 4.15 Recapitulation (mm. 192-220); CF and S theme (mm. 29-30) ........................... 107
vi
LIST OF DIAGRAMS AND TABLES
Diagram 1.1 Six subtypes of the eighteenth-century Type 5 sonata, with particular reference to
Mozart’s Concerto .............................................................................................................. 5
Diagram 1.2 R1 .............................................................................................................................. 8
Diagram 1.3 S1 + R2 ................................................................................................................... 11
Diagram 1.4 S2 ............................................................................................................................ 14
Diagram 1.5 S3 ............................................................................................................................ 15
Diagram 1.6 R4 ............................................................................................................................ 16
Diagram 2 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Clarinet Concerto K. 622, 1st movement ..................... 26
Diagram 3.1 Ludwig Spohr, Clarinet Concerto No. 1 Op. 26, 1st movement ............................. 41
Diagram 3.2 Ludwig Spohr, Clarinet Concerto No. 2 Op. 57, 1st movement ............................. 55
Diagram 3.3 Ludwig Spohr, Clarinet Concerto No. 3, WoO 19, 1st movement .......................... 71
Diagram 3.4 Ludwig Spohr, Clarinet Concerto No. 4, WoO 20, 1st movement .......................... 81
Diagram 4.1 Carl Maria von Weber, Clarinet Concerto No. 1 Op. 73, 1st movement ................ 99
Diagram 4.2 Carl Maria von Weber, Clarinet Concerto No. 2 Op. 74, 1st movement .............. 109
Diagram B.1 The Opening Ritornello........................................................................................ 115
Diagram B.2 Solo and Larger Expositions: Solo 1 + Ritornello 2 ............................................ 116
Diagram B.3 Development and Recapitulation: From Solo 2 through Ritornello 4 ................. 117
vii
Introduction
Scholarly studies of clarinet concertos primarily involve the historical investigation of
performance practice, edition comparison, and recording guides. Very few essays examine the
formal structure of a clarinet concerto, and the repertoire that has been explored is relatively
narrow. There are ample studies of Mozart’s Clarinet Concerto and twentieth-century
compositions by Carl Nielsen, Aaron Copland, and Elliott Carter. However, the works composed
in the late Classical and early Romantic periods have not been studied thoroughly. Furthermore,
the previous analyses of clarinet concertos present several problems in terms of understanding
the structure of a concerto movement, determining the function of each section, and interpreting
them with proper terminology. With the questions and problems raised from the existing clarinet
concerto analytical literature, which includes incomplete and out of date analyses and the limited
explore other early nineteenth-century concertos. I will also discuss the concertos composed by
Louis Spohr and Carl Maria von Weber: specifically, their formal structure in terms of Sonata
Theory—a comprehensive and novel analytical technique proposed by Hepokoski and Darcy.1 In
addition, I will provide the early nineteenth century clarinet concerto literature review, a
movements, and the comparison of these works. My analyses will offer a critical reading of these
1
James Hepokoski and Warren Darcy, Elements of Sonata Theory: Norms, Types, and Deformations in the
Late-Eighteenth-Century Sonata (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006).
1
Chapter I
A Summary of Hepokoski and Darcy’s Sonata Theory—Type 5
Sonata
Sonata Theory is a recent analytical approach. Proposed by Hepokoski and Darcy, it
offers a comprehensive method with which to investigate the structure of a concerto’s first
movement.2 This methodology is not only novel to the clarinet research literature, but is also an
adequate solution to the issues mentioned above. The Sonata Theory’s emphasis on the sonatas
Weber.
sonata form that include: 1.) “eclectic analytical writing” by Donald Francis Tovey and Charles
and Leonard G. Ratner; 3.) Schenkerian linear-contrapuntal views and harmonic “interrupted”
two parts form; and finally 4.) Arnold Schoenberg, Rudolph Réti, and William E. Caplin’s
analytical notions of harmony, counterpoint, phrase, and rhythm, and introduces the novel
According to Hepokoski and Darcy, sonata form is not a set of rules or a fixed scheme.4
“Rather, it is a constellation of normative and optional procedures that are flexible in their
realization—a field of enabling and constraining guidelines applied in the production and
2
Hepokoski and Darcy, 430-602.
3
Ibid., 3-6.
4
Ibid., 15.
2
interpretation of a familiar compositional shape.” 5 In confronting a work in the sonata form,
Hepokoski and Darcy seek “to determine which gestures in it were normative within the style,
which were elaborate, elegant, or strained treatments of the culturally available norms, and which
were not normative at all. Sonata Theory starts from the premise that an individual composition
is a musical utterance that is set (by the composer) into a dialogue with implied norms. This is an
understanding of formal procedure as dynamic, dialogic.”6 The deformations from the expected
norms can be an aesthetically positive contribution to the interest of a piece that will also affect
the progress of a piece as a whole. In conclusion, the Sonata Theory reconstructs what these
norms were, based on an extensive study of the sonatas from the late eighteenth century.
Another important concept introduced by Hepokoski and Darcy is the rotational layout,
which serves as a guide for understanding the order of musical ideas and the modular events in
subsequent action spaces. For instance, in the development, recapitulation, and coda sections, the
musical ideas are usually reprised in the same order as they appear in the exposition. Also, each
section is expected to accomplish certain goals set by the composers. In addition, Hepokoski and
Darcy take the rhetorical layout into the consideration. The rhetorical layout of a sonata is a set
of action spaces that are articulated by cadences and moments of structural punctuations. These
action spaces include Primary-Theme zone (P), Transition (TR), Secondary-Theme zone (S),
Essential Expositional Closure (EEC), Retransition (RT), and Closing zone (C), and they
Finally, because each large scale schema contains several subdivisions, all modular
identifiers in the Type 5 sonata are double-designations in the order of the section and zone-
module; and a colon and a backslash separate the two halves. For instance, R1:\P represents the
5
Hepokoski and Darcy, 15.
6
Ibid., 10.
3
P-theme introduced within the first ritornello; R1:\ P1.2 indicates the second module of the P-
theme introduced within the first ritornello; S1:\TR shows a new transition theme within the first
solo section.7 The terms and abbreviations that are used in this document are included in
Appendix A. The following is the summary of Hepokoski and Darcy’s Type 5 Sonata.
7
Hepokoski and Darcy, 452-3.
4
Section 1. Overview of Type 5 Sonata
In the early eighteenth century, the idea of a concerto was based on the principle of
alternating tutti-solo contrasts: the juxtaposition of a group and an individual soloist (or a smaller
and Darcy’s Sonata Theory the orchestral ritornello is labeled R, for example R1, R2, R3, and R4.
The solo section is indicated as S, such as S1, S2, and S3. In a large scale framework, the first
movement of a concerto from the eighteenth century, especially Mozart’s concertos, can be one
Diagram 1.1 Six subtypes of the eighteenth-century Type 5 sonata, with particular reference to
Mozart’s Concerto8
R1 S1 R2 S2 R3 S3 R4
Soloist
Orchestra cadenza
I I V V V vi vi I I I
(ii, iii)
i i III III III v v i i i
(v, iv) (III, iv)
R1 S1 R2 S2 R3 S3 R4
Soloist
Orchestra cadenza
I I V V V x I I I
8
Hepokoski and Darcy, 437-438.
5
Subtype C: three-ritornello variant, suppressing or minimizing the potential tutti-effect (“R3” of
Subtype B) at the tonic return
(Material from R1 and S1)
R1 S1 R2 S2 [“S3”] R4
Soloist
Orchestra cadenza
I I V V V x I I I
Subtype D: Nine-part (four-ritornello) format, with an interior ritornello in the developmental
space.
(Material from R1 and S1)
Orchestra cadenza
I I V V V x x I I I
R1 S1 R2 S2 “S3” R4
tonal resolution
Soloist
Orchestra cadenza
I I V V V x I I I
usually similar usually parallel to
to the opening the “second half”
of S1 of S1 or R1:\S1 synthesis
Subtype F: Type 5 adaptation of the Type 1 Sonata; R2 proper may also be suppressed in favor
of an “R3”-effect.
(Material from R1 and S1)
R1 S1 R2 R3 S3 R4
Soloist or only “R3”-
retransition
6
Subtypes A and B are particularly important. They are the ones most frequently
encountered in Mozart’s concertos. Additionally, they are described by Koch in his famous
Versuch of 1793, which is the basis for much revisionist scholarly work on the concerto toward
the end of the twentieth century. Subtypes C, D, and F concern the problematic status of the R3-
S3 layout. Subtype C is similar to B but with no ritornello claimed at the onset of the
recapitulation. Subtype D is a nine-part format that is also similar to Subtype B, except that
Subtype D has an “extra” ritornello that is used to reinforce a central developmental PAC in vi,
iii, or ii. In the Subtype E, the S2 merges directly into the crux and tonal resolution, bypassing
any R3 effect. This situation may be interpreted as an S2 S3 (S2 merges to S3) fusion. Finally,
Subtype F represents the movements that have only exposition and recapitulation parts, and the
following S1’s final cadence, the next ritornello is primarily serving as a retransition. This kind
7
Section 2. R1: The Opening Ritornello, R1
The opening ritornello (R1) serves three functions: 1.) introductory/anticipatory function;
2.) expositional-rhetoric function; and 3.) referential-layout function. In Mozart’s early concerto
works, in some of the smaller-proportioned wind-concertos’ first movements, and in many Type
5 slow movements, the R1 serves simply as an introductory function because of its relative
brevity and its general retention of the tonic key throughout. Furthermore, many abridged R1s
are rhetorically structured as non-modulating expositions. In this instance, the R1 often involves
the production of a more energetic TR-like zone, a rhetorical MC, and the introduction of a new
module with “secondary-theme” character, all stated in the tonic key. Additionally, in some cases
the layout may be that of a continuous exposition. However, some R1s present a succession of
modules whose ordering remains largely constant in the fuller rotations that follow. In other
Diagram 1.2 R1
In general, one can find a fully extended Primary-Theme zone (R1:\P) that comes to a
I:PAC close elided with a forte Transition zone (R1:\TR). Occasionally an R1:\P idea, including
its I:PAC, is restated and as the result the R1:\P zone closes at the second I:PAC. However, in a
smaller-scale opening ritornello, the R1:\P zone is reduced to a mere head motif and quickly
moves into R1:\TR zone before any I:PAC is attained. Such instance is understood as P TR
mergers. Moreover, sometimes the initial module, or general rhythmic figuration, or contour of
8
the R1:\P, can recur repeatedly and spread out at various locations within the movement. When
this happens, the R1:\P becomes a motto or idée fixe which can function as a “wild card”—an
inert card that may be placed onto the sonata-table at any number of later occasions, at nearly
every available opportunity. The best examples of “wild card” concerto movements are Mozart’s
Piano Concerto Nos. 19, 21, 24, and one of Spohr’s clarinet concertos that will be demonstrated
Three types of transition zones are commonly found within a large-scale R1. The first,
and the most frequently used, is the independent transition that sets forth a new thematic module.
The second is the reinforced and varied transitional dissolving restatement. The third, and the
least common, is the developmental transition or transition that arrives as the motivically related
culmination of R1:\P. However, this third developmental transition is the trademark in Spohr’s
clarinet concertos.
In most cases R1:\TR eventually comes to a dominant-lock and Medial Close (MC,
usually an HC but occasionally a V:PAC), followed by a brief Caesura Fill (CF) before the
arrival of Secondary-Theme zone (R1:\S). The MC divides R1 space into two parts, but not all
R1s are divided with an MC in the center. It is possible to have no MC effect at all, and to result
in a continuous R1. As for CF, in some R1s, it is expanded to the extreme that it suppresses the
opportunity of a “real” Secondary theme (S) that is supposed to happen next. In this instance, the
Next, Secondary-Theme zone (R1:\S) is parallel to the secondary theme in other non-
concerto sonata movements in terms of its rhetorical shape and purpose. It almost always opens
with a soft dynamic, and usually with a cantabile theme. In addition, most of R1:\S begins in the
tonic key and remains in tonic, but frequently, the interior of secondary theme may modulates to
9
other keys before returning to the tonic. There are few instances where R1:\S begins in the non-
tonic key, but this purposeful “S-misstep” is corrected quickly and re-stabilized back to the
original tonic. The R1:\S zone concludes with an EEC (I:PAC); however, one should be
especially alert when deciding the placement of EEC since there might be several PAC effects
within the S space. It would be better to make out the case for the alternative interpretations
Once the location of the R1:\EEC is decided, the remainder will occupy as Closing zone
(R1:\C). R1:\C can begin in different ways in terms of its dynamics and thematic material. For
example, when R1:\S is concluded in a piano dynamic and elided with R1:\C, the latter zone
often begins with an abrupt forte. In most cases, the forte R1:\C is a new theme; it is not P based.
However, a forte R1:\C is not common. More frequently, the R1:\C begins with a soft dynamic
and concludes with a forte flourish that rounds out R1 with fortified rhetorical punctuation.
Some modules of R1, such as R1:\P, will appear in later spaces; however, others may fail
to appear again in the exposition but only resurface in the synthesis in the recapitulation. This
can happen when S1:\S is entirely new or S only tracks parts of R1:\S. If the last few S theme or
closing-zone materials do not re-emerge to conclude Ritornello 2 (R2), it is more likely they will
appear in Ritornello 4 (R4). Occasionally one may find a module within R1 that does not appear
again, and this is especially possible within pre-MC modules, but rarely will an interior R1:\S-
module fail to resurface later in the piece. A special case is Mozart’s Clarinet Concerto in which
R1:\S2, measures 31-39, is unique to R1. It does not appear again in other sections of the piece.
10
Section 3. Solo and Larger Expositions: Solo 1 + Ritornello 2
In general, the overall scheme of S1 and R2 is as follows (Diagram 1.3):
Diagram 1.3 S1 + R2
The initial solo entry S1 can be treated in various ways. I will point out only three options.
The first, and also the first-level-default procedure in Mozart’s concertos (especially the earlier
ones), is to have come to a full close, and a soloist enters by sounding the opening of the R1:\P
theme in the tonic. A soloist may play the R1:\P theme bar-for-bar, but more often with
within the R1 space, S1 may begin by tracking only the first few measures of the R1:\P and then
proceed to an immediate expansion and new material on its own. The second method is to have
the soloist enter with new material preceding the onset of R1:\P, such as links, bridges, and
prefaces. In fact, several of Mozart’s concertos call for the soloist to make an initial appearance
with a new idea that has not been presented in the R1. The length of this newly inserted module
is varying. If it is longer and more complex, it will be realized as an S1:\Ppreface. Other shorter
passages may serve only as a brief link or bridge between the end of R1 and the reiteration of
R1:\P within S1. An S1:\Ppreface example is Weber’s Second Clarinet Concerto which will be
discussed in this document. Finally, the third option is to have the soloist enter with a new theme
11
The closure of R1:\P within Solo 1 section (S1) is usually accomplished by the soloist
who leads directly into a brief orchestral tutti— Tutti Interjection (TI). The TI can be modulatory,
but in some concerto movements the TI flourishes into a non-modulatory P-codetta, which is
usually followed by a short rest and a new push forward—normally led by the soloist—into the
TR is the next structural zone. Its content can be the same as R1:\TR, or something
entirely new (S1:\TR). But one should pay special attention to the sujet-libre type of transition.
In this type of transition, the soloist takes over the initial new theme decisively and that theme,
intended as a fresh impulse, progresses to an extended phase. The sujet-libre transition can
progress in one of the following ways: 1.) the “linkage technique” where the soloist takes its cue
from the motivic-work animating the end of S1:\TI1 and begins to build a transition that leads off
with a refashioning of that material; 2.) the S1:\TI1 is omitted, and the R1:\P theme moves
directly onto a “new idea” S1:\TR (sujet-libre); 3.) S1:\TI1 serves modulatory purpose and sujet-
libre transition begins off-tonic. The best example of the third type is Mozart’s Clarinet Concerto,
which will be examined in the next chapter. Regardless of the type of transition selected, TR
drives toward a I:HC, V: HC, or V:PAC, or in minor-mode movements, toward their analogues.
This cadence opens the door onto a new, non-tonic zone—Secondary-Theme space (S).
S-space in Solo 1 (S1) contains all or some of the R1:\S elements. The simplest scheme is
to have S1 revisit R1:\S as the entirety of its own S-space without significant additions or
substitutions; however, this happens infrequently. Most commonly, the opening module of R1:\S
is used to begin Solo 1 S-space but is provided with a different continuation. In some concerto
movements, the S-space can also be expanded by applying Tri-Modular Block (TMB) strategy—
12
associated with the phenomenon of “apparent double medial caesuras.” Individual blocks may be
designated as TM1, TM2, and TM3. At its end, the TMB leads to an Essential Expositional
Closure (EEC). TMB is Mozart’s most frequent strategy for expanding mid-exposition space,
and the last block of a TMB—TM3—usually comprises R1:\S or R1:\S1.1 material. Mozart’s
famous Clarinet Concerto is one of the instances. There is only one concerto movement in which
Mozart retained R1:\S1.1 at TM1 rather than at the last block. In general, all or some of R1:\S
materials may appear in S1:\S, but it is also possible that R1:\S does not appear in S1 at all.
Some S1:\Ss begin with new material that is not elaborated as TMB, or the R1:\S can be replaced
The S-space of Solo 1 (S1) comes to an end with an EEC which has to meet two criteria:
it is not only the first satisfactory perfect authentic cadence that goes on to differing material, but
also the first V:PAC (or III:PAC) that has no R1:\S module sounded after it within the S1. The
placement of this S1:\EEC is variable, but very often S1:\EEC elided with S1 closing space
which is primarily occupied by Display Episode (DE). DE is the final element of the solo
exposition. It features the climactic spotlighting on the soloist’s part, like brilliant runs, scales
and arpeggios, all for the purpose of accumulating energy toward the trill cadence that leads into
R2 plays two roles in the exposition. First, it provides enhancement of the cadential
conclusion of Solo 1 (S1). Second, it seeks to complete the still ongoing rotation by supplying
some or all of the missing modules from the end of R1. Usually, R2 can begin with modules such
as R1:\TR1.1, R1:\P, or it can even begin with new material. However, when R2 starts with an
13
Section 4. Development and Recapitulation: From Solo 2 through Ritornello 4
In a Type 5 sonata movement, the development space can occupy only Solo 2 (S2), or
both S2 and the following Ritornello 3 (R3). This space also has its own tonal and thematic
design. The tonal schema in S2 includes circle-of-fifth or other discursive progressions, like
exploration of minor modes and dominant locks. The melodic materials are relatively freer and
more episodic than non-concerto sonata movements. In other words, in the development section,
composers often pursue materials loosely related to the previous R1 and S1, or follow only a
characteristic rhythm or a small feature of the figuration. Still there are some concertos in which
its S2 returns to variants of R1:\P at or near the opening of S2. As a result, this kind of S2 is a
“rotational” type of development. The overall shape of S2 is described as below (Diagram 1.4).
Diagram 1.4 S2
Linkage technique
Mozart frequently began a Solo 2 section (S2) by having the soloist seize upon the final
figure of Ritornello 2 (R2), restate it as a germinal idea, and then move on to the next new
module. Such an instance can be found in Spohr’s Clarinet Concerto No.2 and in both of
Weber’s Clarinet Concertos. Next, the central action is a modestly sized central block of
sequences in which a soloist performs rapid passagework. During the soloist’s display passages,
an orchestra may play a number of Tutti Interjections (TI) which occur particularly frequently in
the beginning of S2; however, the number of TI occurrences is variable from one piece to
another. Some concerto movements have up to six TIs, but some do not have any TI at all.
14
Finally, Retransition (RT) is the last event zone in the development, and it is the
various lengths. In some cases, the RT occupies only the last zone of S2 or appears in the
following R3, but in some movements, the RT uses both S2- and R3-spaces.
Diagram 1.5 S3
S3 (solo-led)
The opening of solo recapitulation (S3) could exhibit one of the three plans: 1.) solo-led—simply
indicated as S3; 2.) double-start opening R3 + S3; and 3.) R3 S3 merger opening. In the solo-
led S3 movement, the S3 starts the same way as S1. Additionally, in this type of recapitulation
the preceding R3 often function as RT. The second option, R3 + S3, shows the orchestra plays
R1:\P to mark the structural moment of recapitulation, but within four or five bars the soloist
comes in to lead and replicates the opening of S1. Here, the R3 no longer serves as an RT. Lastly,
in the R3 S3 merger, the solo recapitulation begins with a decisive tutti pillar replicating the
beginning of R1:\P. However, within a few measures the soloist re-enters to assist with or to take
over the continuation of S3. This strategy avoids the redundancy of double-start recapitulation.
In Mozart’s middle and late concertos, this is the most common option.
The simplest way to compose an S3 is to track only the modules in S1, but composers do
not always choose this option. The relationship between S3 and previous event zones, such as R1,
S1, and R2 is variable from one piece to another. In some instances, the S3 is the synthesis of R1,
15
S1, and R2. In other movements, the S3’s S- and C-spaces restore the R1:\post-MC materials
suppressed in the S1 + R2. Nevertheless, in some cases the plan is the opposite.
R4 is the final orchestral ritornello that closes a concerto movement. One of the primary
tasks of R4 is to pick up any remaining loose ends of the composition. It always completes the
recapitulation rotation by bringing back the concluding modules of R1 that were not included in
the S3, or by reinstalling any R1 modules that had not been heard since the R1. Many of
Mozart’s concertos’ first movements feature such reinstatements at the end. R4 is often straddled
by the soloist’s cadenza even though in the clarinet concerto that is not the case. The overall
Diagram 1.6 R4
When the R4 is subdivided, the orchestral R41 presses efficiently toward the grand 6$
chord which opens the path to a solo cadenza. Then, the orchestral R42 follows and elides with
the soloist’s last trill-cadence. In Mozart’s concertos, the R41 is commonly outfitted with
differing materials, and the R42 often brings back the R2-referential music. Another common
choice is to split the R2 music between R41 and R42. Nonetheless, it is possible to include only
R2 material in R41, and leave R42 free to restore previously unsounded material from R1.
The following chapters contain the analyses of clarinet concertos by Mozart, Louis Spohr,
16
Chapter II
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Clarinet Concerto, K. 622
Mozart’s most famous encounter with the clarinet was in Mannheim in late 1777 during
his return trip from Paris. He extended his stay until 1778 and observed the Mannheim Orchestra,
which was famous throughout Europe for its splendid complement of string and wind
instruments. Mozart’s friendly association with its woodwind section players, such as flutist
Johann Wendling, oboist Friedrich Ramm, and bassoonist Georg Wenzel Ritter, increased his
interest in those instruments.9 Anton Stadler, a celebrated Austrian clarinetist, met Mozart at the
home of Countess Wilhelmine. Soon after Mozart’s move to Vienna in 1781, the two became
friends; Stadler often performed in Mozart’s Masonic works, and Mozart also entrusted Stadler
with certain business dealings. Mozart wrote many pieces especially for Stadler, including the
Clarinet Concerto K. 622, which was composed between September 28 and November 15, 1791
several issues have emerged in those investigations. For example, in Colin Lawson’s well-known
examination of the concerto, he states, “Another aspect of the Clarinet Concerto’s first
movement which varies from the pattern established within the piano concertos is the insertion of
a ritornello after the development (allowing the soloist pause for breath) and subsequent
participation by the clarinet at the very beginning of the recapitulation.”11 In fact, the occurrence
Hepokoski and Darcy, it also functions as a retransition. This particular ritornello features
9
Otto Jahn, Life of Mozart, trans. Pauline D. Townsend (London: Novello, Ewer & Co., 1882), ii: 36-40.
10
Otto Erich Deutsch, Mozart’s Catalogue of His Works, 1756-1791, facsimile (New York: Herbert
Reichmer, 1956), 36.
11
Colin Lawson, Mozart: Clarinet Concerto (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 62.
17
Mozart’s most extended retransition of all his concertos in that it incorporates several thematic
ideas from the earlier sections and then expands outward.12 Lawson continues, saying, “the
Concerto is unusual for its date in offering no context for a genuine cadenza, in which it again
differs from the precedent within Mozart’s piano concertos.”13 It is true that the omission of
cadenza is contradictory to Mozart’s piano concertos, but it is not rare for its date. From the same
compositional period when he wrote the Clarinet Concerto, Mozart’s Horn Concerto No. 1 (1791)
and No. 2 (1783) also lacked a cadenza. Hepokoski and Darcy have commented on Mozart’s
Clarinet Concerto throughout the Elements of Sonata Theory.14 The following is a summary of
their analysis.
The opening ritornello (R1) consists of seven zones: P, TR, S1, S2, C1.1, C1.2, and C2. The
R1:\P theme concludes with an IAC at measure 16. The Transition (TR) follows immediately
and articulated by an half cadence (I:HC) at measure 24. At the next measure the R1:\S1 theme
begins which has a lyrical quality; it does not contrast to the characteristic of R1:\P (Ex. 2.1).
However, the succeeding R1:\S2 theme is unique to the R1 and it does not appear in the later
rotations. Furthermore, Hepokoski and Darcy point out when there are two secondary themes (S)
in R1, the S-space in S1 section is often constructed by tri-modular blocks (TMB) and the S1
theme of R1 is used in one of the blocks. This is evident in Mozart’s Clarinet Concerto. The S1
of this concerto movement contains tri-modular blocks. In addition, the R1:\S1 serves as the TM3.
The R1:\S2 ends at measure 39 with an EEC, and lastly, the Closing zone (R1:\C) is divided into
C1.1, C1.2, and C2. Measures 55-56 from the C2 function as rhetorical punctuation; they re-emerge
as a tutti interpolation that marks the end of Primary-Theme zone in the S1 and S3 sections.
12
Hepokoski and Darcy, 576.
13
Lawson, 62.
14
Hepokoski and Darcy, 139-596.
18
Example 2.1 R1:\P (mm. 1-8); R1:\S1 (mm. 25-31) and R1:\S2 (mm. 31-39)
R1:\S1
R1:\S2
19
The Solo 1 (S1) section opens with the R1:\P theme, and the Tutti Interjection (TI)
follows at measure 75 where the orchestra reprises the material of measures 55-56 for rhetorical
purpose, but suddenly the music draws back to piano dynamic and collapses into A minor with
the onset of the sujet-libre type of Transition (S1:\TR). The S1:\TR zone is divided into TR1.1,
TR1.2, and TR1.3. As shown in Example 2.2, the TR1.1 is first stated in A minor, but quickly the A
minor moves onto C major at measure 85 where the TR1.2 begins. However, the harmony
continues to shift in the TR1.2; it modulates to E minor at measure 94 and stays in the dominant
chord until the TR1.3 arrives at measure 100. The TR1.3 only lasts for four measures; soon it falls
into the first Tri-Modular block (TM) at measure 104 which beings contrastingly in A major.
Example 2.2 S1:\TR1.1, TR1.2, and TR1.3, is a case of sujet-libre transition (mm. 78-103)
S1:\TR1.1
S1:\TR1.2
20
S1:\TR1.3
The Secondary Theme-space (S) of the Solo 1 (S1) contains Tri-Modular Blocks: TM1,
TM2, and TM3. The new theme of S1:\TM1 (Ex. 2.3) seems capable of being regarded as the first
expositional secondary theme. Its sixteenth figures in measure 108-111are originated from
measures 20-23. Nonetheless, the S1:\TM1 closes with a PAC of E major and immediately
merges into the S1:\TM2 at measure 115, which drops at once to C© minor. The S1:\TM2 behaves
reactively; it starts the subsequent recovery at measure 123 and continues to set up another MC
that occurs at measure 127 in A major. The TM3 arrives at measure 128 where the R1:\S1 is used
21
as the primary theme. The S-space finally comes to an Essential Expositional Closure (EEC) at
measure 134.
As for the next zone, Closing zone (C), Hepokoski and Darcy especially point out the
structure of a C-space within the S1 is varied from one movement to another. One’s analytical
result is highly interpretive because it depends on the analyst’s prior decision about the locations
of the EEC and C-space within the R1. In Mozart’s Clarinet Concerto, the C-space in S1 begins
with the orchestral thematic statement of R1:\C1 at measure 134, then it merges into the soloist’s
Display Episode (S1:\DE) at measure 138 (Ex. 2.3). The S1:\DE concludes with a trill-cadence
in E major at measure 154, and the Ritornello 2 (R2) section follows immediately which consists
Example 2.3 Tri-Modular blocks (mm. 104-134) and Closing zone (mm. 134-140) within the S1
S1:\TM1
S1:\MC1 S1:\TM2
V:PAC
22
S1:\MC2
V: V7
TM3
R1:\S1
S1:\EEC
R1:\C1
Closing zone
23
S1:\DE
Example 2.4, it begins with a sentential reference to the incipit of R1:\P, then it is led into other
melodies. After the Tutti Interjection (TI1), the S1:\TR1.2 is resounded again at measure 200 until
measure 214. The Retransition (RT) begins at measure 216 and continues to expand into the
Ritornello 3 (R3) space. This is the most extended retransitional R3 in Mozart’s concerto works.
It occupies twenty-two measures (mm. 227-248), and it incorporates an opening passage in free
style and some R1:\TR materials. Harmonically, it modulates from the soloist’s concluding PAC
in C© minor to an active dominant chord of the tonic A major. Then, it is followed by three more
bars of solo-led fill (mm. 248-250), which elides in its fourth bar with the onset of the solo-led
recapitulation.
24
The Solo 3 (S3, recapitulation) section is parallel with the Solo 1 (S1) with some
variations: the length of the S1:\TR1.2 is reduced, and the melodic content of the TM2 differs from
In most of Mozart’s concerto movements, the final ritornello (R4) is divided into two
parts: R41 and R42, straddled by the soloist’s cadenza. However, three of Mozart’s concerto
movements lack of a cadenza within R4 and consequently these R4s do not subdivide into the
normative R41; R42. K. 622 is one of the cases. The other two are his Vienna-period wind
concertos, Horn Concerto No. 1 and No. 2. The R4 of the clarinet concerto is constructed by
R1:\TR, R1:\C1.2, and R1:\C2. Overall, this movement is an example of a seven-part format: four
25
Diagram 2 Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Clarinet Concerto K. 622, 1st movement
Ritornello 1
MC m. 24 A major: HC
R1:\S1 mm. 25-31 lyrical quality but does not contrast to R1:\P
R1:\S2 mm. 31-39 it is unique to R1 and it does not appear in later rotations
EEC m. 39
Solo 1
EEC m. 134
26
Ritornello 2
Solo 2
TI1 mm. 192-200 mm. 194-200 brief interplay between orchestral and soloist
TI2 m. 215
RT mm. 216-227
Ritornello 3
Fill mm. 248-250 elides in its 4th bar with the onset of the solo-led recap.
27
Solo 3
S1:\MC1 m. 303
S1:\MC2 m. 315
Ritornello 4
28
Chapter III
Louis Spohr’s Clarinet Concertos
Louis Spohr (1784-1859) has been regarded as worthy of a place beside Haydn, Mozart,
and Beethoven. He was also known as an experienced conductor and a virtuoso violinist whose
playing was admired by Queen Victoria. When he was a concertmaster at the court of the Duke
of Gotha from 1805 to 1812, Spohr wrote his first two clarinet concertos for Johann Simon
Hermstedt’s teaching, the duke became a passionate clarinetist and commissioned Spohr’s first
concerto for the instrument. The friendship between Spohr and Hermstedt resulted in four
variations, and a potpourri. All were written for and first performed by Hermstedt.15 In addition
to the achievements of instrumental virtuosity and musical substance, these four concertos
represent a major contribution to the development of the clarinet not only in terms of repertory
but also of instrumental construction. The technical demands of the First Clarinet Concerto
required modifications to the instruments.16 Moreover, Spohr was the first promising composer
after Mozart to compose concertos for clarinet, and along with Weber, was one of the important
Hermstedt acquired Spohr’s manuscripts of all of the concertos and smaller pieces
composed for him. Because his popularity had generated a demand for his works by prominent
publishers who were willing to pay handsomely for them, Spohr was able to persuade Hermstedt
to allow publication of his first two clarinet concertos and the two concert-pieces Op. 80 and Op.
81. Later, after Hermstedt agreed to release the remaining compositions in his possession, Spohr
15
Pamela Weston, Clarinet Virtuosi of the Past (London: Robert Hale & Company, 1971), 77-100.
16
Ibid., 155.
29
continued to publish other clarinet works under Hermstedt’s supervision. However, the project
Although Spohr composed numerous clarinet works, the research of those compositions
is scanty, particularly the concertos. The only scholarship on this subject is dated in 1972,17 and
the other two documents focus on Spohr’s violin compositional style and chamber music.18 The
following sections are the analyses of a sonata form in the first movement of his clarinet
concertos. These concerto movements contain a lengthy, elaborated sonata form and feature
17
Stephen Keith Johnston, “The Clarinet Concertos of Louis Spohr” (DMA thesis, University of Maryland,
1972).
18
Jonathan Andrew Sturm, “The Evolution of a Dramatic Compositional Style in the Violin Concertos of
Louis Spohr” (DMA thesis, Indiana University, 1995). Martin Wulftorst, “Louis Spohr’s Early Chamber Music
(1796-1812): A Contribution to the History of Nineteenth-Century Genres” (PhD dissertation, City University of
New York, 1995).
30
Section 1. Clarinet Concerto No. 1 in C minor, Op. 26
Without a doubt, Anton Stadler, Johann Simon Hermstedt, and Heinrich Baermann were
the three greatest clarinetists of the early nineteenth century. Stadler became well known due to
his relationship with Mozart; however, Hermstedt and Baermann possessed such immense talent
that they would have become famous without their connections with Spohr and Weber. In
contrast to his serious rival, Baermann, Hermstedt traveled outside Germany only once and made
no attempts at composition himself. However, Hermstedt was probably the one who had the most
advanced performance technique of them all, and indeed, it was his supreme skill that enabled
When writing the First Clarinet Concerto, Spohr confessed that he had little knowledge of
the instrument, he simply composed based on Hermstedt’s inspirational performance and his
own musical background. The result was a series of violin-like passages, and the phrases soar up
to written pitch C7, which is very high on the clarinet. Hermstedt set out to improve his clarinet
in order to cope with the technical challenges—he added a total of eight keys to his five-keyed
clarinet.19 The premiere of the concerto took place on June 16, 1809 with Hermstedt playing the
Clarinet Concerto No. 1 is the only one of the four clarinet concertos that begins with a
slow orchestral introduction (R1). Incidentally, three of Spohr’s fifteen violin concertos also
have a slow orchestral introduction. This clarinet concerto opens with four beats of timpani
tremolo. Coincidently, Beethoven’s Violin Concerto Op. 61, composed earlier in 1806, has the
exact same opening. After only four measures of woodwind introduction, the Primary Theme
(R1:\P0) plunges onto a surprising bVI tonicization—Ab major, and the Ab major continues for
19
Pamela Weston, Clarinet Virtuosi of the Past (London: Robert Hale & Company, 1971), 82.
31
seven measures before returning to an unequivocal C minor tonic center at measure 13. Then, the
P theme is restated in the “correct” key of C minor in R1:\P1 module (mm. 15-22). Because the
R1 comprises only two statements of the P theme, one including the unexpected modulation and
the other staying entirely in the tonic key, suggests that the opening R1 is a single zone that
serves little more purpose than to act as an anacrusis to the solo exposition (S1). In other words,
this R1 does not provide expositional layout, but only introductory/anticipatory function.
The R1:\P0 theme serves as the thematic seed for the entire movement (Ex. 3.1). The
rhythmic figure and melodic contour of this theme recurs throughout the movement and spreads
out at various locations, for instance, Tutti Interjection (TI), Transition (TR), Secondary–Theme
(S), Display Episode (DE), Ritornello 2 (R2), and Closing (C) spaces. In other words, the R1:\P
functions as the idée fixe motto. According to the Sonata Theory, the idée fixe motto can be used
like a “wild card”—one can play it at anytime, and Spohr’s First Clarinet Concerto’s first
movement precisely demonstrates this feature. Other “wild card” concerto movements include
Mozart’s later Piano Concertos No. 19, K. 459; No. 21, K. 467; and No. 24, K. 491.
The Solo 1 (S1) occupies measures 23-131. As shown in Example 3.2, the soloist starts
the S1 with a R1:\P-based Primary Theme (P) lightly accompanied by the orchestra, and the
melody quickly sprouts into a triplet quasi-display passage after the initial cadence at measure 33.
32
Next, the orchestra’s Tutti Interjection (TI) takes over for four measures, which is, again,
constructed by the idée fixe motto. This idée fixe motto is then immediately picked up by the
display passage
type of Transition (TR), and it is divided into three modules: TR1.1 (mm. 44-55), TR1.2 (mm. 61-
69), and TR1.3 (mm. 69-78); a Tutti Interjection (TI2) is inserted between the TR1.1 and TR1.2. The
TR1.1 begins with the soloist’s continuation of the previous orchestra-led idée fixe motto, then the
soloist’s melody moves onto a different melodic resolution and a series of triplet figures that
were first heard in the quasi-display passage at measure 28 (Ex. 3.3). Although the idée fixe
motto is played only twice by the orchestra in the TR1 module, the idée fixe motto quickly takes
over the course of following TI2 and TR1.2 spaces. First, the TI2 (mm. 55-60) is primarily
constructed by the idée fixe motto with the soloist’s responsorial fragments. On the one hand,
this particular TI2 serves as a mediator that connects TR1.1 and TR1.2; on the other hand, it is used
for rhetorical purpose to articulate other sections within the movement—it marks the end of S
space in the S1(m. 95) and initiates the beginning of TR space in the S3 (m. 219). Second, the
TR1.2 module is built upon the stretto technique as shown in Example 3.3. The orchestra presents
the idée fixe motto twice in two beats apart and the solo clarinet joins the stretto texture another
33
two beats later. Lastly, and interestingly, the TR1.3 (mm. 69-79) foreshadows what is to come in
the next Secondary-Theme space(S)—the orchestra introduces the S theme at measure 69, which
contains the incipit of the R1:\P. Meanwhile, the clarinet soloist performs repetitive chromatic
Example 3.3 TI1 and TR1.1 (mm. 40-50); TI2 (mm. 55-60); TR1.2 (mm. 61-63); TR1.3 (mm. 69-72);
and S theme (mm. 88-92)
34
TI2 (mm. 55-60)
TI2
stretto
TR1.3
S theme
After a series of arpeggios, the Secondary-Theme zone (S) begins at measure 88 with the
theme introduced earlier at measure 69. This theme is concluded shortly at measure 95 and
followed by the TI2 material (mm. 55-60); however, the S theme is unexpectedly reiterated by
35
the soloist at measure 101 and it is further imitated by French horns (Ex. 3.4). Then, the melody
further develops into sequences and scales, and finally ends with a PAC—or EEC to be more
precise—at measure 112. The S1 S-space could have closed at measure 101, but Spohr reopened
the space by repeating the S theme. It will be appropriate to interpret this additional section,
repeating the S theme when obviously the S action zone has been established. Perhaps he chose
to do so because the S1.1 ends with an open cadence and he felt the need of a stronger cadence; or,
since the S-space is not included in the R1 section, it is entitled to be stated twice; or, simply
because Spohr wanted to provide the soloist more “improvisation” or “cadenza”-like moments
imitation
Next, the Display Episode (DE) is primary constructed by the soloist’s scale-like passage
and the orchestra’s inverted idée fixe motto. When the DE concludes with the soloist’s trills
cadence at measure 131, the Ritornello 2 (R2) begins immediately with the R1:\P theme, which
lasts until measure 142 where another EEC occurs. Then, an idée fixe motto-based codetta
The development section (S2) encompasses measures 151-193. Because the S2 does not
pursue the S1 modules closely, and the S2’s materials only take up a few characteristic
36
figurations that were sounded in the R1, the S2 here is best understood as an episodic
development rather than rotational. First, the descending gesture from note G to B of the opening
S2 phrase catches the essence of S theme (Ex. 3.5). However, this phrase plunges into a long
lyrical melody and begins to gain a self-standing character. This new melody provides not only a
momentary break from the idée fixe motto, but also serves as a vehicle for the tonal shifting from
Eb major to Bb major.
Example 3.5 S theme (mm. 88-89) and the opening melody of Solo 2 (mm. 151-154)
Secondly, the idée fixe motto resurfaces at measure 162 as the orchestral Tutti
Interjection (TI), but it is expanded slightly and sounds somewhat more tranquil. This TI is
immediately repeated at measure 164 and is serenaded by the soloist’s triplets, which quickly
move onto the previous G-B descending gesture at measure 167. As demonstrated in Example
3.6, Spohr cleverly used only a few ingredients to create a well-rounded episode (mm. 151-169).
The opening S2 melody reminds the listener of the Secondary Theme (S) within the S1, although
it still carries through to a small independent developmental phase. The milder version of the
idée fixe motto occurs two times in the orchestral part while the clarinetist’s triplets appear the
second time. At the end, the recurring G-B gesture echoes the melody that opens S2. The result is
37
Example 3.6 The opening of S2 (mm. 151-169)
Finally, the central action zone arrives at measure 170 where the soloist plays sixteenth
arpeggiated passages accompanied lightly by the orchestra’s idée fixe motto. The harmonic
progression of measures 179-193 is particularly engaging. At measure 179 the harmony is locked
into the dominant of C minor, and the melody reaches its climax at measure 183. The S2 space is
to be closed after the orchestra’s roaring Caesura Fill (CF), but unexpectedly the orchestra lands
on a deceptive cadence at measure 187. Since Solo 2 (S2) section normally concludes with an
active dominant chord of the home key, the deceptive cadence has reopened the S2 space; Spohr
therefore had to correct it. The next zone (mm. 188-194), interpreted as Retransition (RT),
redirects the harmony back to rightful active dominant chord via German augmented sixth chord
→ cadential 6$ → V7 in measures 192-193, before the recapitulation begins. The music of this
C minor: V --------------------------------------------------
38
RT
DC
Gr.+6 cad.6$ V7
VI
The recapitulation starts at measure 194, where the orchestra first plays the R1:\P1 theme
then, the soloist follows with the Primary Theme (P) from the Solo 1 (S1): the same presentation
occurs as in the beginning of this movement except that it omits the R1:\P0. Because R1:\P1 is
introduced twice (please note that R1:\P1 and P-theme within the S1 are based on the same
thematic idea), this recapitulation is the best example of a double-start opening: R3 + S3. In other
words, rather than starting from the soloist entry at measure 202, the recapitulation begins when
the orchestra plays the R1:\P1 in the home key of C minor at measure 194. The recapitulation
continues with the same zone/module rotation as the S1, only it omits the TR1.1 module. However,
the tonal plan of this module is rather interesting. The key signature changes from three flats to
no flats (C major) at measure 225. After a short visit in Eb major and C minor, the C major is
firmly established at the S-space (m. 252) and is carried through to the end of the movement. In
brief, this concerto movement begins in C minor and ends in its parallel C major. To conclude
this movement, the final ritornello (R4) rotates the R2 modules, and the soloist chimes in at the
final codetta.
Overall, the first movement of Spohr’s Clarinet Concerto No. 1, Op. 26 is a “wild card”
concerto movement. The idée fixe motto is used in almost all the modules and zones, and is
incorporated in the primary theme, orchestral accompaniment, imitation and stretto texture, and
39
other various melodies. The opening R1 acts like an anacrusis to the solo exposition due to its
material content and brevity. On the other hand, the S1 contains a lengthy, developmental type of
Transition (TR) which, according to Hepokoski and Darcy, is uncommon. The recapitulation is
an example of a double-start R3 + S3 opening, and yet the movement ends in C major rather than
in the home key of C minor. Thus, the structure of this movement is closely related to Koch’s
sonata form Subtype B—seven-part (four ritornello) format and “Ritornello 3”-effect launches
Example 3.8 Subtype B in Spohr’s Clarinet Concerto No. 1, Op. 26, 1st movement
R1 S1 R2 S2 R3 S3 R4
Soloist
Orchestra
i i III III III bVII i i I I
20
Hepokoski and Darcy, 437.
40
Diagram 3.1 Ludwig Spohr, Clarinet Concerto No. 1 Op. 26, 1st movement
Ritornello 1
Solo 1
Ritornello 2
41
Solo 2
Central action mm. 170-183 Eb major → C minor; Dom. lock begins at m. 179
R3 + S3
Ritornello 4
Codetta mm. 307-314 The soloist joins at the last seven measures.
42
Section 2. Clarinet Concerto No. 2 in Eb Major, Op. 57
Spohr’s Second Clarinet Concerto was requested by Hermstedt for his appearance in the
first ever music festival held at Frankenhausen, Germany in 1810. The concerto was premiered
on June 21, 1810 and Gerber praised, “a splendid and brilliant treatment of the tutti
instruments…the luster of the artistic solo passages…brought much honor to the composer, the
soloist, and the entire orchestra.”21 However, the performance at Kassel, 1812 was severely
criticized for its aimless modulations and undifferentiated character from Spohr’s violin
concertos.22 Besides discussing the structure of this concerto movement, the following analysis
The most noticeable trait in the opening ritornello (R1) is the soloist’s entry within the
Primary-Theme space (R1:\P, Ex. 3.9). Although in the concertos from Baroque and Classical
periods soloists often join the orchestra in the opening ritornello, the kind of soloistic passage
that appears in Spohr’s Clarinet Concerto No. 2 is rare. Following the R1:\P is a developmental
type of Transition (TR). This type of transition is also found in Spohr’s First Clarinet Concerto.
This R1:\TR comprises two modules: TR1.1 (mm. 8-20) and TR1.2 (mm. 20-35), and they are
followed by a Medial Close (MC, mm. 35-43). Although these modules are unified by the same
motif, each of them is developed in its own way. As Example 3.10 illustrates, each module
begins with a presentation of the motif. The R1:\TR1.1 primary emphasizes the rhythmic property
of the motif. After another short reprise of the motif at measure 20, the R1:\TR1.2 moves on to a
series of repetitive and sequential phrases and later it settles on the dominant pedal of Bb major.
The R1:\TR1.2 comes to an end at measure 35, but the motif continues to spin out above the
21
Gerber, “Nachricht von einem in Thüringen seltenen Musikfest,” 753-754, quoted in Stephen Keith
Johnston, “The Clarinet Concertos of Louis Spohr” (DMA thesis, University of Maryland, 1972), 57.
22
Pamela Weston, Clarinet Virtuosi of the Past, 86.
43
prolongation of the dominant chord (mm. 35-39). Unexpectedly, the melody modulates to Db
major at measure 41. This zone (mm. 35-43) not only functions as a Medial Close (MC), but also
serves a modulatorial purpose that provides the harmonic connection between the Transition
zone (TR—Bb major) and the Secondary-Theme zone (S—Db major). Overall, this post-P space
motif
Example 3.10 R1:\TR1.1 (mm. 9-13); R1:\TR1.2 (mm. 20-26); R1:\MC (mm. 35-42)
44
R1:\MC (mm. 35-42)
motif
Bb major: V --------------------------------------------------
Db major: V7 vi IV
modulation and economical usage of the motif. Example 3.11 shows the R1:\S theme contains a
dotted rhythm—the primary element of the R1:\P motif. In addition, the R1:\S modulates
chromatically from Db major to D minor and Eb major, and closes with an Essential
Expositional Closure (EEC) that is immediately followed by the Closing space (C). In this R1:\C
space (mm. 56-67), Spohr combined the R1:\TR1.1 and R1:\TR1.2 materials that both comprise the
motif. The R1:\C concludes with a PAC in Eb major (m. 67), and is immediately succeeded by a
codetta (mm. 67-72) where the motif is reprised over the prolongation of V-I progression.
Db major
45
used as S1.2 within the S1
The Solo 1 (S1) begins with the same melody—R1:\P—heard in the Ritornello 1 (R1),
but this time the melody is entirely played by the soloist rather than alternated between the
orchestra and soloist. The Transition zone (TR) follows at measure 80, where the orchestra plays
an accompaniment that is based on the R1:\TR1.1, and the soloist performs scale-wise sequential
phrases. The first TR module ends with a PAC in Eb major (m. 88), and yet another module of
TR, is launched at measure 90 after a brief Tutti Interjection (TI, mm. 88-90). Although the first
TR module within the S1 echoes the R1:\TR1.1, the second TR module does not reflect the
R1:\TR1.2 material bar-by-bar. Only the opening descending arpeggio can be traced back to the
R1:\TR1.2 idea (Ex. 3.12). Furthermore, contrasted with the R1:\TR2’s vigorous quality the
second TR’s melody exhibits mellifluous expression that demonstrates the singing ability of the
clarinet. This TR melody concludes with a PAC in Gb major and it is followed by another short
Tutti Interjection (TI, mm. 100-102). Coincidently, the material of this TI (m. 100-102) is the
same as the previous TI of measures 88-90. The soloist jumps in to play another TR passage at
measure 101 before the orchestra finishes its TI. This final TR module (TR1.3, mm. 101-106)
merges to the Medial Close (MC) at measure 106, which is identical with the R1:\MC (mm. 35-
39). The soloist’s melody in this section (mm. 102-112) is sounding above the F pedal that
46
Example 3.12 R1:\TR1.2 (mm. 90-92) and TI (mm. 100-102) within the S1
TI (mm. 100-102)
Starting from measure 115, the Secondary-Theme space (S) within the S1 traces the
R1:\S theme except that the S theme is stated entirely in Bb major without modulating to other
key this time. However, Spohr treated this R1:\S material in an interesting way in this S1 S-space.
The R1:\S theme is divided into two halves, and they are used in two different locations within
the S-space. The first part of the R1:\S, measures 44-48, is reprised at measure 115 with further
fortspinnung, and closes at measure 122 with a PAC. After a brief Tutti Interjection (TI2 mm.
122-125), the soloist’s melody resumes at measure 124. The latter part of the R1:\S (mm. 48-52)
is then sounded at measure 126. To conclude, the PAC at measure 131, which is understood as
EEC, marks the end of the S1 S-space and also launches the Display Episode (DE) that follows.
The DE occupies measures 131-158. Because of the differences of the melodic content
and a short Caesura Fill (CF, m. 146) inserted in the middle, this DE is divided into DE1.1 and
DE1.2. In the DE1.1 (mm. 131-146), the orchestral accompaniment is primarily focused on the
motif, while the soloist plays nonstop scale-like phrase. The soloist’s melody continues to grow
into an arpeggiation extravaganza that encompasses the clarino and chalumeau registers of the
instrument (Ex. 3.13). This DE1.1 demonstrates the characteristic of Spohr as a virtuosic violinist
and composer because of the uninterrupted phrase structure and the wide melodic range. Thus,
47
this clarinet concerto shows the similar character found in Spohr’s violin concertos. Finally, in
the DE1.2 the orchestra continues to play the motif while the soloist performs a series of
Next, the motif and other modules from the Ritornello 1 (R1) are recycled in the
Ritornello 2 (R2) space (mm. 158-180), but none of them are presented in their entirety. Instead,
the R2 is like a collage of various materials. As shown in Example 3.14, the first section of the
R2 (mm. 158-166) begins with the R1:\TR1.1’s dotted rhythmic motif. Then, at measure 166 the
melody shifts to the sequential phrases that are from the earlier R1:\TR1.2 (mm. 29-30), but
quickly it moves onto a module (mm. 170-180) that mixes the elements of R1:\S, R1:\TR1.1, and
R1:\TR1.2. Overall, this R2 is a lengthy prolongation of I-V harmonic progression and a synthesis
of all the modules that have been heard so far in the movement.
48
S theme R1:\TR1.1 + R1:\TR1.2
The Solo 2 (S2) takes off at measure 180. It is initiated by a linkage technique—the
soloist picks up the orchestra’s sixteenth figure from the end of the R2. Then, the soloist’s
melody continues to a new theme that is unique to the movement (Ex. 3.15). Despite the fact that
Spohr has shown significant economical usage of the motif, the new theme in the S2 exhibits a
lyrical and expressive quality that contrasts with the march-like motif. Additionally, this theme
49
Example 3.15 R2 to S2 (mm. 178-186)
S2 link
new theme
The orchestral Tutti Interjection (TI) immediately succeeds at measure 198. Once again,
the motif is used to construct this TI and it continues to be incorporated in the texture, especially
in the next coming episode of measures 199-216. In the orchestral part of this episode, the motif
is first used in the manner of stretto and repetition in measures 199-202, and then it takes over
the course of the accompaniment part and expands into a sequential section at measures 203-210.
Furthermore, the motif becomes the foundation of the dominant pedal of C minor (mm. 212-215).
While the orchestra plays the motif-based accompaniment (mm. 199-215), the soloist performs a
free-style episode that precisely demonstrates the clarinet as an agile instrument. As Example
3.16 shows, the soloist’s melody spans three octaves. Moreover, the melody swings swiftly
50
Example 3.16 S2 (mm. 199-206)
Because of the wide melodic range in the soloist’s part and the modulation from Bb
major to C minor, the section of measures 199-210 sounds unsettled. Only when the dominant
pedal of C minor is established (m. 212) and the soloist plays the familiar arpeggio figures from
the TR3 (mm. 102-106 = mm. 212-216) does the music become stable. This short episode comes
to an HC in C minor at measure 216, which prepares the onset of the next action. This interior
point—C minor: HC (m. 216)—is best interpreted as Mitte according to Konrad Küster.23
After three measures of TI and the soloist’s linking passage (mm. 216-218), Spohr
skillfully opens the next zone (m. 219) in C major instead of continuing the previous C minor.
Although the first half of the S2 section includes a new theme, the second half of this section,
starting from measure 219, recycles the S1.1 theme and begins to prepare the arrival of
recapitulation. As illustrated in Example 3.17, the S1.1 is first iterated in C major at measure 219.
Then, the following TI and the soloist’s linking passage (mm. 226-228) resemble the earlier
materials in measures 216-218 except that the motif is added into the texture in the latter TI. At
measure 229 the S1.1 is restated in C minor but quickly modulates to Eb major. Soon, the
harmony locks to an active dominant chord at measure 234 that launches the Retransition (RT).
Here, the soloist performs a series of the motif while the orchestra plays the sixteenth figures that
23
Hepokoski and Darcy, 571.
51
come from the preceding TI (mm. 226-227). Finally, the S2 section concludes in pianissimo
dynamic (m. 240) but immediately proceeds to the recapitulation S3 without a Ritornello 3 (R3).
TI
cm CM
TI motif
RT
52
Recap.
The recapitulation (S3) opens at measure 240 with the R1:\P theme. Because this theme
is first played by the orchestra and then by the soloist, instead of being played by the soloist
exclusively, like the presentation in the exposition (S1, mm. 72-80), this recapitulation is
all the zones within the S1 except this entire S3 is in Eb major with a brief visit in Cb major. The
S-space within the S3 is articulated by an Essential Structural Closure (ESC) at measure 298,
before the repetition of the DE1.1 and a slightly modified version of the DE1.2. The movement
closes with a short Ritornello 4 (R4, mm. 323-331) that is based on the R1:\Codetta.
To summarize, the first movement of the Clarinet Concerto No. 2, Op. 57 shows Spohr’s
economic treatment of the motif. Although the motif is evident in each zone, it is not as
exclusive as in his First Clarinet Concerto’s first movement that is understood as a “wild card”
Type 5 sonata. Especially, Spohr introduced a new theme in the S2 of the Second Concerto’s
first movement. As a whole, the movement resembles Koch’s Subtype C sonata form—three-
ritornello and two-solo variant, suppressing or minimizing the potential tutti-effect (“R3” of
Subtype B) at the tonic return.24 Moreover, the clarinet soloist’s melodies cover all the registers
of the instrument. The melodies exhibit the fortspinnung compositional technique. Also, the
frequent modulation is another special feature in this movement. Often, a melody travels through
24
Hepokoski and Darcy, 437.
53
several key areas within a short period of time. In all, this concerto movement certainly is a
Example 3.18 Subtype C in Spohr’s Clarinet Concerto No. 2, Op. 57, 1st movement
Material from R1 and S1
R1 S1 R2 S2 [“S3”] R4
Soloist
Orchestra
I I V V V vi, VI I I
54
Diagram 3.2 Ludwig Spohr, Clarinet Concerto No. 2 Op. 57, 1st movement
Ritornello 1
R1:\P mm. 1-8 Eb major; clarinetist plays a solo passage at mm. 4-8
R1:\C mm. 56-67 PAC at m. 67; combines TR1.1 and TR1.2 elements
Solo 1
R1:\P mm. 72-80 Eb major; same as R1:\P but all is played by soloist
R1:\TR1.1 mm. 80-88 I:PAC at m.88; the orchestral part is the same as R1:\TR1.1
Link mm. 112-114 soloist picks up the previous TI’s dotted rhythm
R1:\S1.1 mm. 115-122 Bb major; based on the first half of the R1:\S—mm .44-48
R1:\S1.2 mm. 126-131 based on the second half of the R1:\S—mm. 48-52
55
Ritornello 2
collage mm. 166-180 mixture of various zones: R1:\TR1.2, R1:\S, and R1:\TR1.1
Solo 2
New theme mm. 183-190; mm. 191-198 Bb major; antecedent and consequence phrases
TI m. 198
Episode mm. 199-216 soloist’s free style vs. motif; Eb major → C minor
TI mm. 216-218
Link m. 218
TI mm. 226-228
Link m. 228
56
Solo 3
Ritornello 4
57
Section 3. Clarinet Concerto No. 3 in F Minor, WoO 19
In March, 1821 Spohr received an invitation from Hermstedt to compose a new clarinet
concerto to be presented at the Alexisbad in the Harz Mountains. The performance took place on
July 27, 1821. This concerto is similar to his previous two clarinet concertos, featuring extensive
melodic range, frequent modulation, and economical treatment of the motifs; however, it exhibits
Unlike the Clarinet Concerto Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the first movement of the Concerto No. 3
begins with a grand fortissimo Ritornello 1 (R1). The Primary Theme (R1:\P, mm. 1-10) is a
sentence phrase structure. This R1:\P is immediately followed by three measures of Transition
(R1:\TR) that takes the music from F minor to F major. The next zone, Secondary Theme (R1:\S,
mm. 15-39), is particularly interesting. The S theme (mm. 15-25) is first stated in F major, and it
is an elaborated sentence phrase structure as well. This theme ends with a dominant chord at
measure 25, but after a short Caesura Fill (CF), the S theme is reiterated at measure 27 in F
minor. In this latter S theme statement (mm. 27-40), the melody progresses to a different
resolution: it spins out on the ideas of the dotted rhythm and trills before it merges to the Closing
zone (R1:\C) at measure 40. As a whole, the R1:\S space is best understood as R1:\S1.1 → CF →
R1:\S1.2, which is demonstrated in Example 3.19. Similarly, in Spohr’s Clarinet Concerto No. 1
and No. 2, the S space also comprises S1.1 and S1.2. In his First Clarinet Concerto, the S theme in
the S1 section is stated twice with the two instances separated by a filler passage; and the S1.1
ends on a dominant chord and the S1.2 concludes with a PAC. Furthermore, in the Second
Clarinet Concerto the R1:\S theme is divided into two halves within the S1 section. The former is
used as the S1.1, and the latter is incorporated into the S1.2 in the S1. A Tutti Interjection (TI) is
58
Example 3.19 R1:\S (mm. 15-39)
In addition, Spohr’s economical treatment of the motif is also found in the R1 of his
Third Clarinet Concerto, first movement. The dotted rhythm and trills in the opening R1:\P (Ex.
3.20) are evident in the Transition zone (R1:\TR). Later, the Secondary Theme (R1:\S1.1) also
shows a variation of the motif. The motif is further developed in measures 37-39 via
fortspinnung. Finally, in the Closing space (R1:\C) the motif first turns into sequential passages
(m. 41), and then it is recalled again at measure 51. An annotated score of this section is
provided in Example 3.20. Although the motif spreads out in several locations within the R1, it
exhibits two opposite characters: the muscular character in a traditional sense, such as the
opening of this movement; and the cantabile, like the character found in measure 33.
motif
R1:\P
F minor
59
R1:\TR
motif
R1:\S1.1
F major
CF
R1:\S1.2
V F minor
60
fortspinnung
R1:\C1.1 motif
R1:\C1.2
While the orchestra plays the concluding cadence of the R1 section (mm. 56-58), the
clarinet soloist comes in at measure 56 with eight beats of note C before the reiteration of R1:\P
in the Solo 1 (S1). This note C is best interpreted as a link to the S1’s R1:\P statement. The R1:\P
launches at measure 58 where the soloist performs only the first four measures of the R1:\P
theme. Immediately, the soloist’s melody begins to develop; first, the melody expands to a wide
61
range that incorporates the clarino and chalumeau registers (mm. 62-64), then it undergoes a
fortspinnung (mm. 65-68), and the musical tension starts to generate through the repetitive
rhythmic pattern at measure 69.The melody reaches its climax at measure 71. A Tutti Interjection
(TI1) is then sounded right after, but the soloist interrupts this TI1 at measure 73 and plays a long
note C. Unexpectedly, the R1:\P is being played again at measure 75, although this time, the
R1:\P moves to a different melodic resolution. Even though the two P-theme presentations share
similar characteristics, such as wide melodic range and the sixteenth rhythmic figures, stating the
R1:\P theme twice within the S1’s P-space is an unorthodox procedure. In this context, this post
Link R1:\P
R1:\C1.2
fortspinnung
62
TI1
V
Link P-appendix
63
Next, the orchestra plays a short Tutti Interjection (TI2, mm. 86-88) after the closing of P-
space. The TI’s idea is immediately picked up by the soloist in the Transition zone (TR) at
measure 88, and this idea develops into a new theme that qualifies this TR for a sujet libre type
of transition, which is designated as S1:\TR here. This TR (mm. 88-102) not only serves a
modulatorial function (from F minor to Ab major), but also provides the thematic seed for the
later Display Episode (DE). The triplets and syncopated rhythm of this S1:\TR are used to
construct the DE that starts at measure 145 (Ex. 3.22). In fact, due to its sequential phrase
structure and the technique difficulty this TR zone sounds like a DE.
Example 3.22 S1:\TR (Sujet libre type of transition, mm. 93-96); DE (mm. 145-148)
DE (mm. 145-148)
Following the S1:\TR is the Medial Close (MC, mm. 102-116), which serves dual
functions. First, harmonically it provides further prolongation of the dominant pedal of Ab major.
Second, melodically it contains a virtuosic passage that not only supplies a “written-out”
improvisation moment for the soloist, but it also helps to dissolve the S1’s P-space into S-space
smoothly. As shown in Example 3.23, the Medial Close (MC) begins with the R1:\TR material,
then the soloist chimes in with ascending arpeggios and descending chromatic scales. The
melody becomes fragmented in both soloist and orchestra parts at measure 112, and finally the
clarinet’s melody melts into the R1:\S1.1 theme at measure 116. It is noteworthy to mention that
64
in both Spohr’s Clarinet Concerto No. 2 and No. 3, the Secondary Theme (S) in the Solo 1 (S1)
is preceded by a linkage. Especially in the Second Clarinet Concerto, the linking melody is based
on the dotted rhythm that is used in both earlier Tutti Interjection (TI) and the following S theme.
However, in the Clarinet Concerto No. 3, the linking melody (mm. 111-116) inherits neither of
the elements from the preceding and succeeding events. This linkage is unique to itself. In brief,
Spohr showed different ways of connecting P- and S-spaces in these two instances.
Link
R1:\S1.1
65
The Secondary-Theme zone (S) consists of two modules that are based on the R1:\S
theme. The first one, S1.1, occupies measures 116-129, where the tonality modulates from Ab
major to Gb major with a PAC at the end. The tonality continues to move from Gb major to E
major and Ab major in the S1.2 (mm. 129-145). Finally, the Essential Expositional Closure (EEC)
occurs at measure 145 and the Display Episode (DE) launches at the same time. Although it
includes the material of sujet libre S1:\TR (mm. 93-102), this DE also contains other types of
virtuosic passages, such as octave skips, arpeggios, and chromatic scales. To conclude, the DE
finishes with a trill-cadence (PAC) in Ab major that elides with the Ritornello 2 section (R2).
Spohr introduced a new theme in the Ritornello 2 section (R2, Ex. 3.24). This new idea
occupies most of the parts of the R2, and later merges to a reprise of the R1:\TR that modulates
→ B → E (mm. 176-181). Furthermore, the replay of the R1:\TR provides a gateway to the Solo
2 section (S2). It is possible that Spohr chose to recycle the R1:\TR material here because the S2
begins with the Secondary Theme (S) rather than the Primary Theme (P). There, the R1:\TR
new theme
The opening section of Solo 2 (S2) incorporates both S1.1 and S1.2 modules. They are
separated by a Tutti Interjection (TI) at measure 191. However, the S1.2 is presented in the
66
orchestral accompaniment at measure 193 while the soloist plays the triplet sequential passages
(Ex. 3.25). Because in this section (mm. 193-202) the soloist’s part features repetitive rhythmic
pattern and sequential phrase structure, it is best to interpret this space as a central action zone. In
addition, the S1.1-space (mm.181-191) and central action zone (mm.193-202) contrast with their
modal relationship—E major and E minor respectively. Correspondingly, the S1.1 and S1.2 within
the Ritornello 1 (R1) exhibit the same property, F major and F minor.
S theme
E minor
The soloist’s triplet rhythm continues, but the tonality has begun to shift at measure 203.
It modulates from E minor to Eb major, and travels back to the home key of F minor at measure
205 where the i-V harmonic progression is further prolonged. The triplet rhythm is played
throughout the section from measures 193-211, but the central action zone has merged to the
Retransition (RT) space undetected at measure 203. Furthermore, the triplets are used in the RT
and even extend to the following Ritornello 3 section (R3). In other words, the triplet sequential
passages cross three consecutive event zones: central action, RT, and R3. However, they serve
different purposes according to their harmony and texture. The score of this section is
67
Example 3.26 Central action merges to RT, and continues to R3 (mm. 201-211)
E minor Eb major
R3
F minor
Once again the Solo 3 section (S3) begins with a link (mm. 217-219), then the soloist’s
melody moves onto the R1:\P with a different melodic fortspinnung. Contrastingly, there is no P-
appendix within the S3. The music comes to the Medial Close (MC, mm. 234-248) that has the
same materials as the MC (mm. 102-116) within the S1. Next, instead of continuing the F minor,
the R1:\S1.1 is stated in F major— another example of modal relationship: R1:\P in F minor and
R1:\S1.1 in F major. The following R1:\S1.2 briefly visits Eb major, Db major, and back to F major.
The entire Secondary-Theme space (S) concludes with an Essential Structural Closure (ESC) at
measure 277, where the Display Episode (DE) immediately follows. This DE contains the same
The last section of the movement, Ritornello 4 (R4), recalls the new theme that is heard
in the Ritornello 2 (R2). The final R4 is not straddled; however, the soloist plays another sujet
68
libre-based (mm. 93-96) passage beginning at measure 307 till the end of the movement (Ex.
3.27). The movement ends in F major instead of in its home key of F minor. Coincidently,
Spohr’s First Clarinet Concerto also has the same tonal plan: it begins in C minor but concludes
in C major.
R2 theme
F major
To summarize, Spohr again shows economical treatment of the motif in this movement.
This movement also exhibits characteristics that are found in his earlier clarinet concertos,
including extended phrase structure, interplay between the soloist and orchestra in the Medial
Close (MC) before the arrival of Secondary-Theme zone (S), the division of S theme—S1.1 and
S1.2—and frequent modulation. Nevertheless, this movement exhibits new features, such as the
linkage, and the post P material “P-appendix.” In the final analysis, the first movement of
69
Spohr’s Clarinet Concerto No. 3 contains the structure proposed by Koch—Subtype A, seven-
part format.25 Subtype A has three solo sections and four ritornellos. Example 3.28 demonstrates
Example 3.28 Subtype A in Spohr’s Clarinet Concerto No. 3, WoO 19, 1st movement
R1 S1 R2 S2 R3 S3 R4
Soloist
Orchestra
i i III III VII vii i i I
25
Hepokoski and Darcy, 437.
70
Diagram 3.3 Ludwig Spohr, Clarinet Concerto No. 3, WoO 19, 1st movement
Ritornello 1
R1:\S1.2 mm. 27-40 F minor; repeats S1.1 plus fortspinnung; ends on the tonic
R1:\C1.1 mm. 40-45 features the motif of dotted rhythm and scale-wise passage
Solo 1
R1:\P mm. 58-71 F minor; fortspinnung and dominant pedal at the end
TI2 mm. 86-88 the melody is picked up by soloist in the next event
S1:\TR mm. 88-102 sujet libre type of TR; mm. 93-94 is used in the DE
Ritornello 2
71
Solo 2
Ritornello 3
Solo 3
DE mm. 277-296
Ritornello 4
72
Section 4. Clarinet Concerto No. 4 in E Minor, WoO 20
The Clarinet Concerto No. 4 was composed in Kassel, 1828 for Hermstedt’s performance
at the Nordhausen Music Festival, June 12, 1829. The first movement of this concerto exhibits
the same sonata form as the Third Clarinet Concerto—Subtype A, seven-part format.
Furthermore, this movement shows the compositional style found in other Spohr’s clarinet
concertos. The detail of the sonata form in this movement is presented in the following analysis.
Example 3.29 Subtype A in Spohr’s Clarinet Concerto No. 4, WoO 20, 1st movement
R1 S1 R2 S2 R3 S3 R4
Soloist
Orchestra
i i III III bIV I i i I
The thematic construction of this movement is highly motivic. Example 3.30 illustrates
that the opening Primary Theme (R1:\P) provides two fundamental elements—melodic and
rhythmic motifs. First, the melodic motif (mm. 1-4) is used in several event zones, including
Transition (TR), Closing (C), Display Episode (DE), and Ritornellos 2 and 4 (R2, R4); the motif
also undergoes the transformation of diminution and fragmentation. Second, the rhythmic motif
(mm. 4-5) is evident throughout the movement as well. It mostly appears in the fashion of
sequence and imitation. In addition, the dotted rhythm is further incorporated in the Secondary
Theme (S). In other words, Spohr continues the trademark of his economical usage of the motifs.
73
The first Transition module (R1:\TR1.1) occupies measures 17-32. In this space, the
melodic motif is stated three times and following the third statement, the motif becomes
fragmented before it elides with the R1:\TR1.2 (Ex. 3.31). The R1:\TR1.2 primarily consists of
repetitive phrases that juxtapose above the D pedal, which serves as a pivot in the modulation of
G minor to G major. The rhythmic motif also takes part at measure 33 and soon becomes
rhythmic motif
R1:\TR1.2
diminution
The succeeding Secondary Theme (R1:\S) is a lyrical melody that contrasts with the
previous Primary Theme (P). Correspondingly, this particular S theme is also divided into S1.1
and S1.2, in the same way as other Spohr’s clarinet concertos’ first movements. As shown in
Example 3.32, the R1:\S1.1 (mm. 44-54), a sentence structure phrase, starts in G major, then
74
modulates to E minor. The R1:\S1.1 elides with the R1:\S1.2 at measure 54, but the R1:\S1.2 only
lasts for four measures and quickly merges to Closing space (R1:\C) at measure 58 without any
cadence—an Essential Expositional Closure (EEC) is omitted at this point. While the upper
strings play the descending sequential passages, the melodic motif is sounded in the bass part in
the form of diminution. Finally, the Ritornello 1 section (R1) closes at measure 73 where the
G major
R1:\S1.2
E minor
R1:\C
motif
The soloist leads the Solo 1 section (S1) with the R1:\P theme at measure 73; however,
the soloist plays only the first eight measures of the R1:\P, then the orchestra picks up the
75
remaining R1:\P theme at measure 81. Meanwhile, the soloist moves onto an ascending scale in
triplets—a new rhythmic motif that will be further developed later in the movement.
The Primary Theme (P) space elides with the onset of Transition zone (R1:\TR1.1) at
measure 89 where the orchestra leads for two measures before the soloist joins. Again, Spohr
recycled the P theme in composing this TR1.1. The P theme is first heard in the orchestral part,
which is topped with the soloist’s descending chromatic scale (mm. 92-96). After the orchestra’s
two P-theme statements (mm. 89-97), the soloist presents the P theme again at measure 97, and
the theme becomes fragmented in measures 101-102. In this zone (mm. 89-102), the tonality
modulates from E minor to G major, and suddenly it goes to Bb major for a short time span at
measure 103. The texture is further refreshed by a new theme that is interpreted as TR1.2 in the
analysis (Ex. 3.33). This new theme incorporates both dotted rhythm and triplets, and yet it has a
lyrical quality. Coincidentally, this TR1.2 is somewhat similar to the Secondary Theme (S); they
have the same melodic outline. As Example 3.33 shows, the first note of each phrase in the TR1.2
and S theme is ornamented with arpeggios and followed by a descending gesture. The only
Example 3.33 TR1.1, TR1.2 (new theme), and TR1.3 within the S1 (mm. 97-114); S theme
R1:\TR1.1
P theme
76
TR1.2 new theme
TR1.3
melodic motif
d pedal
S theme
After a brief visit to Bb major, the TR1.2 travels back to G minor and merges to TR1.3 at
measure 110, where the P motif reoccurs in the orchestral part and the soloist performs a series
of arpeggios above the long sustained dominant pedal. At measure 120 the soloist plays a triplet
77
linking passage before the coming Secondary-Theme zone (S). This particular procedure —
which precedes the S zone with a linkage—is a default setting in Spohr’s clarinet concertos; he
set up the S theme with a connecting phrase in all of his clarinet concertos.
the S theme is composed with S1.1 and S1.2, and the latter S1:\S1.2 is slightly expanded. This
structure can also be found in all of the first movements of his clarinet concertos. Next, the S
zone elides with the Display Episode (DE) at measure 144. The melodic motif, with the
transformation of rhythmic diminution, is played throughout the DE by the orchestra. The Solo 1
section (S1) closes with the soloist’s trills at measure 166, and the orchestra continues to play the
The Solo 2 (S2) begins at measure 184. This section occupies only twenty-one measures:
the most compressed S2 in Spohr’s clarinet concertos. After five beats of orchestral introduction,
the soloist presents a new theme at measure 185 that is unique to itself in this movement (Ex.
3.34). This new theme comprises triplets and dotted rhythms, and is played twice in a different
register adjacently (mm. 185-192). Similarly, this new euphonious melody also quickly turns
into fragments (m. 193). However, these fragments provide a gateway for the merger of the new
theme and Retransition (RT). When the soloist continues to play the fragments at measure 193,
the tonality has shifted from Ab major to E major. Then, it modulates to E minor via modal
relationship at measure 200. The RT further occupies the Ritornello 3 section (R3) where the
orchestra plays the R1:\TR1.2 material (mm. 205-210) above the dominant pedal of E minor.
Finally, the soloist performs a brief filler passage and coalesces into the Solo 3 section (S3).
78
Example 3.34 S2 module (mm. 184-205)
new theme
Ab major
S2:\TR
E major
modal relationship
E minor
79
The solo-led Solo 3 (S3) rotates all the event zones within the Solo 1 (S1) with some
melodic variations. The tonality modulates from E minor to E major during the TR1.1 and TR1.2
modules, and remains in E major till the end of the movement. The final Ritornello 4 (R4) is
On the whole, Spohr’s compositional style in his last clarinet concerto is the same as his
earlier concertos—the work he composed nearly twenty years ago. He constantly recycled and
reworked the motif, therefore the entire movement sounded unified. Furthermore, Spohr
introduced new themes in the S1’s TR-space and S2. The new theme in the S2 is special because
it does not appear elsewhere in the movement. As for the harmonic language in this movement,
the tonality modulates frequently, but Spohr seemed to be more interested in the modal
relationship. This relationship is found in the TR1.2, TR1.3 to S1.1within the S1, and S2. Finally,
this concerto movement is a seven-part format, same as the first movement of his Clarinet
Concerto No. 3.
80
Diagram 3.4 Ludwig Spohr, Clarinet Concerto No. 4, WoO 20, 1st movement
Ritornello 1
Solo 1
TR1.3 mm. 110-120 G minor → G major; motif is used in the orchestral part
Ritornello 2
Solo 2
81
Ritornello 3
Fill mm. 210-215 soloist’s passage elides with the onset of the solo-led recap.
Solo 3
ESC m. 290
DE mm. 290-313
Ritornello 4
82
Section 5. Conclusion
All of Spohr’s clarinet concertos consist of three contrasting movements in a fast-slow-
fast sequence. The fast movements are considerably more expansive than the slow movements
(Table 1). Clarinet Concerto No. 1 is the only one of the four concertos that begins with a slow
orchestral introduction. In addition, its Ritornello 1 (R1) only consists of two reprises of the
Primary Theme (P), but all of the other three concertos have an R1 that contains a P theme, a
Transition (TR), a Secondary Theme (S) and a Closing zone (C). In other words, the R1 of
Clarinet Concerto No. 1 serves the introductory/anticipatory function; and the R1 in the Second,
Third, and Forth Concertos serve expositional-rhetoric and referential-layout functions. Also, a
unique feature in the R1 of the second concerto is that the soloist enters at measure 4 for four
measures during the opening orchestral tutti. This kind of scheme is rare. The best example of
this is Beethoven’s Piano Concerto No. 5, Emperor, where the orchestral tutti is interrupted by
Each of the concerto movements contains identifiable motivic components which lend
themselves to thematic manipulation. The most extreme treatment of the motifs is in Spohr’s
Clarinet Concerto No. 1, where the idée fixe motto spreads throughout the movement. As a result,
83
These motifs often recur in the orchestral part as an accompaniment to the soloist’s part,
and they frequently undergo the process of repetition, sequence, fragmentation, and diminution.
A similar motivic figure is used in the second and third movements so the concerto as a whole
sounds homogeneous. Such compositional style can be found in several of Spohr’s violin
concertos as well, and the best examples of this are his Violin Concerto Nos. 7 and 11.
The Solo 1 section (S1) does not present a new theme in any of the clarinet concertos.
However, an interesting structural feature in all concertos, except No. 3, is that the Transition
zone (TR) is further embellished immediately after its first appearance. The primary purpose is
to shift the spotlight to the soloist, but this developmental activity creates an illusion of the
displacement of Display Episode (DE) that is supposed to occur after S-space. Although
Concerto No.3 does not have a lavish TR, its motif is the foundation of the later DE.
Another prominent property of the Solo 1 (S1) is that the Secondary Theme (S) is
preceded by a linking passage. The procedure of having an S zone that follows a linkage is found
in all four clarinet concertos, which suggests that this is a default setting in Spohr’s concerto
composition. Moreover, the S space is divided into S1.1 and S1.2. In the first movement of
Clarinet Concerto Nos. 1, 3, and 4, the initial S1.1 is reprised as S1.2 but the latter S1.2 moves onto
a different melodic resolution. In the Second Clarinet Concerto, the R1:\S theme is divided into
two segments and each one is incorporated in the S1.1 and S1.2 within the S1 respectively.
However, Spohr showed several different designs of the Ritornello 2 (R2). In the Clarinet
Concerto No. 1 and No. 4, the R2 is based on the R1:\P theme. The R2 of the Second Concerto
recycles the materials from several event zones, but the R2 of Concerto No. 3 contains a new
84
In all of Spohr’s clarinet concertos, the development Solo 2 (S2) is short in proportion
compared to the dimensions of the exposition and recapitulation. Although Spohr showed
significant economical usage of the motifs throughout the movement in each concerto, the S2 of
Clarinet Concerto No. 2 and No. 4 contains new theme—especially in the Concerto No. 4, the
new theme occupies the entire S2 space. In addition, the melody of the S2 in Concerto No. 1
contains little essence of the Secondary-Theme idea (S). Overall, the structure of S2 in Clarinet
Finally, all of the Solo 3s (S3) are rotational—they trace the modules from the Solo 1
(S1). The Ritornello 4 (R4) sections are not straddled by a soloist’s cadenza. In fact, there is no
cadenza in any of Spohr’s clarinet concertos. However, the soloist plays a virtuosic passage in
the final codetta section in the Concerto No. 1 and No. 3. In conclusion, the structure of the first
movement of Concerto No. 1 is similar to Koch’s sonata form Subtype B; No. 2 is correspondent
language, which influenced several prominent Romantic composers, including Chopin and
Wagner.26 First, Spohr showed a preference for minor key. Clarinet Concerto No. 2 is the only
one in a major key. Second, the median and modal relationships are often found in between the
modules within a movement, and, on a large scale, in between the movements within a concerto.
These tonal plans are also evident in his violin concertos. Third, these clarinet concerto
movements exhibit a considerable freedom of modulation within a single zone. The result of
these harmonic progressions, particularly exemplified in the Transition space (TR), is a coloristic
effect rather than a tensional force. These progressions usually involved a diminished-seventh
chord, Neapolitan sixth, and augmented sixth, especially the German augmented-sixth chord.
26
Alfred Einstein, Music in the Romantic Era (New York: W.W. Norton, 1957), 241.
85
Despite the fact that these concertos exhibit extravagant virtuoso qualities, there is no
written cadenza provided for the soloist, nor is there an opportunity for improvisation. The great
technical difficulty is caused by Spohr’s violinistic writing. It is easy to find many thematic
figures in the clarinet concertos which resemble Spohr’s violin concertos, especially the
ornamental trills and wide leaps. Since Spohr was a highly accomplished violinist, he possibly
had his own instrument in mind when composing in other media. Nevertheless, Spohr chose his
clarinet concertos to be among the new works he composed for several music festivals in
86
Chapter IV
Carl Maria von Weber’s Clarinet Concertos
Carl Maria von Weber, who was acquainted with Spohr for years, composed several
concertos and concertinos for piano, clarinet, bassoon, and French horn (Table 2). Most of those
concertos were written during his early compositional career. The two piano concertos are lesser
known by pianists while his Concert-Stück Op. 79 remains popular. Several scholars have shown
interest especially in Weber’s piano concertos, but, they emphasized early Romantic
All of Weber’s concertos follow the three-movement plan except the Concert-Stück
which has four movements. The study of the formal structure of Weber’s two clarinet concertos
is less than substantial despite their frequent appearance on concert programs. In these two
clarinet concertos, Weber shows the freedom from formal restraint and dramatic operatic-writing,
87
Section 1. Clarinet Concerto No. 1 in F Minor, Op. 73
Weber’s two clarinet concertos owe their origins to the artistry of the principal clarinetist
of the Bavarian Court Orchestra in Munich, Heinrich Baermann. In the spring of 1811, Weber
wrote the Concertino Op. 26 for him. The piece brought Baermann’s first public concert to a
sensational conclusion in Munich on April 5, 1811, delighting the King Maximilian of Bavaria to
such an extent that the king commissioned two more concertos from the then largely unknown
composer. Within a matter of weeks, Weber had polished off the two concertos; both were
dedicated to Baermann, due to the ties of friendship and to the clarinetist’s contribution to their
composition. The first clarinet concerto, completed on May 17, 1811, was first performed by
Baermann on June 13th in Munich, then later before the King and Queen at Nymphenburg Castle
on September 7th. On March 25, 1812, Weber and Baermann performed together during a
concert tour in Berlin. The second concerto was written immediately afterwards and was first
performed on November 25th in Munich, according to Weber’s diary “with frantic applause
owing to Baermann’s godlike playing.”27 The works were not printed forthwith until 1822 when,
with Weber’s worldwide reputation having been established by Der Freischütz, he could hand
both works to the publisher, Schlesinger of Berlin, who issued them at once as Op. 73 and Op. 74,
taking as a basis not the chronology of the origin of the works, but of the printing.
The opening Ritornello 1 (R1) of the Clarinet Concerto No. 1 Op. 73 in F minor contains
only three zones—Primary Theme (R1:\P), Transition (R1:\TR), and Closing (R1:\C); this design
is rather concise compared to Mozart and Beethoven’s concertos. To make it even more compact,
Weber uses the same rhythmic and melodic motifs for all three zones—a half note followed by
an dotted rhythm and three eighths which outlined the tonic triad, and then a dominant seventh
27
Carl Maria von Weber, Concerto F minor for Clarinet and Orchestra Op.73, forward by Max Alberti
(London: Ernst Eulenburg Ltd.), I.
88
chord (Ex. 4.1). This motif is first played with pianissimo dynamic and is interrupted by a
surprising fortissimo dominant chord in measure 11, and then the orchestra repeats the opening
motif in fortissimo which is designated as R1:\P1 here. Unexpectedly, the same motif is reiterated
in Db major, a six above the tonic, rather than in Ab major—the relative major of F minor. This
Db major area starting in measure 26 serves as the TR zone. Although it elides with the P zone,
there is no cadence that separates the end of P and the beginning of TR, as one can easily find in
other concertos composed by Mozart, Beethoven, and Weber’s contemporaries. The long
awaited cadence occurs in measure 46, followed by a caesura. Due to the lack of cadence prior to
measure 46 and to the constant fortspinnung on the dotted rhythm, the R1 sounds restless and
agitated. In short, the R1 of this concerto movement, measures 1-47, is the only Weber’s
concerto that has such compact formal design. This R1, suggested by Hepokoski and Darcy,
serves only introductory/anticipatory functions. All the other Weber’s concertos, including the
Second Clarinet Concerto, the two Piano Concertos, and the Bassoon Concerto, have a more
Example 4.1 R1:\P0 (mm. 1-11); R1:\TR1.1 (mm. 26-33); and R1:\C (mm. 38-47)
F minor: I V7
F minor
The drama continues to intensify when the solo clarinet enters with the new Primary
Theme (S1:\P1.1, mm. 48-63) that has no correlation to the opening R1:\P1. The lyrical S1:\P1.1
(Ex. 4.2) contradicts the staccatos in the R1:\P1. Indeed, Weber tends to dramatize the soloist’s
entrance by starting Solo 1 (S1) with either new theme or a contrasting melodic style in his
concertos. In the first movement of his Second Clarinet Concerto Op. 74, the solo clarinet opens
with a grand gesture— S1:\Ppreface that encompasses the clarino and chalumeau registers before
the R1:\P is stated in the S1 section (Ex. 4.3). This operatic preface material is later played by the
orchestra to launch Ritornello 2 (R2) and Ritornello 3 (R3) at measures137 and 192 respectively.
Furthermore, Weber takes the first five notes of this melody and elaborates them in the
Transition zone (TR). Moreover, in the Second Piano Concerto the pianist springs to a cadenza
like S1:\Ppreface without orchestral accompaniment (Ex. 4.4), which is then followed by an
90
Example 4.3 S1:\Ppreface (mm. 50-53) of Clarinet Concerto No. 2, Op. 74
Example 4.4 Piano Concerto No. 2, Op. 32, Ppreface (mm. 43-56)
The first PAC is finally heard at measure 73, and it is followed by an orchestral Tutti
Interjection (TI, mm. 74-83) which plays an important rhetorical role in this concerto movement.
This TI is not only used to close the Primary-Theme zone (P), but is also used to close the
movement (Ex. 4.5). It appears at the final ten measures of the movement with the same
91
instrumental arrangement, and the same orchestra-solo interplay relationship. This kind of design
is unprecedented in classical concertos and in other Weber’s concertos where the first movement
ends with R1:\P or R1:\C material. Next, the movement proceeds to a Transition section (TR)
where the low strings play the opening R1:\P, which is then answered by the solo clarinet. The
clarinet continues to play the consequence phrase and closes the TR space by a half cadence in
Ab major at measure 104. The strings respond the half cadence with a two-measure Caesura Fill
Example 4.5 TI within the S1 (mm. 74-83); last 10 measures of the 1st movement
In measure 110, the soloist plays the Secondary Theme (S) which has a lyrical quality
similar to the S1:\P1.1. Both Primary Theme (P) and Secondary Theme (S) comprise two
subphrases; furthermore, they both have a descending gesture and the same starting pitches:
92
written B5 and C6 (Ex. 4.6). Next, the S zone elides with the clarinet’s Display Episode (DE) at
the Essential Expositional Closure (EEC) at measure 130. This DE contains two modules, and
the second of which is a cadenza composed by Baermann. It is clear that Baermann composed
this cadenza based on the central action material from measures 198-214 that primarily
comprises scale-like passages in sixteenths. Above all, the most fascinating feature in this
rotation is that in the Ritornello 2 (R2, mm. 145-170) the modules from Ritornello 1 (R1) are
being presented in reverse order: R1:\TR1.2 appears first, followed by R1:\ TR1.1, and then R1:\P1
(Ex. 4.7). Moreover, in this movement the last orchestral ritornello (R4) is launched by the
second phrase of R1:\P1 and then the first phrase of R1:\P1. This kind of structure is used in other
Weber’s work. In the same way, Weber reversed the order of first and second themes in the
recapitulation of his Trio for Flute, Cello and Piano in G minor, Op. 63.
S1:\P1.1
F minor
S theme
Ab minor
93
Example 4.7 R2 (mm. 145-170)
R1:\TR1.2, mm. 34-35
The Solo2 (S2) begins with the inverted version of S1:\P1.1 in C minor and then the
Secondary Theme (S) in Bb major. Next, the central action contains two modules. The first
module, measures 192-197, is thematically parallel with the first module of Display Episode
(DE1.1) within the Solo 1 (S1). In the second module (mm. 198-222), the solo clarinet is
accompanied by three statements of R1:\P that is played by bassoon, flute, and oboe respectively.
The S2 space continues to extend to the Retransition zone (RT) initiated by French horns in
measure 223 (Ex. 4.8). The material of this RT echoes the earlier Transition (TR) within the S1:
French horns state the R1:\P motif which is then answered by the solo clarinet over the dominant
pedal played by the strings. Such an interrelationship is the same as TR in the S1; however, this
RT rotates only half of the S1 TR and elides to the soloist’s S1:\P1.1 at measure 231 where the
94
orchestra still holds the dominant. Next, the clarinet proceeds to play an arpeggio passage
supported by the dominant pedal, and finally the F minor tonic triad arrives at measure 249 with
orchestral tutti of R1:\P1. At this point, the listener may realize, retrospectively, that the
recapitulation Solo 3 (S3) had begun a few measures early at measure 231 instead of at measure
249. In other words, the end of the development and the recapitulation not only thematically
glides from one to another seamlessly, but it also builds on a long span of dominant chord. The
solo clarinet’s central action ends on viiº7/V, then the RT locks on the dominant chord, and lastly
the entire S3 is supported by V7. As a result, the definitive return of the tonic key does not
coincide with the restatement of S1:\P1.1 and the listener may not immediately detect the onset of
S3. This unorthodox approach to sonata form, non-concurrent return of the tonic and
Symphony No. 1 in C major, the recapitulation begins with the primary theme in C major but
harmonized in V7/IV, and C major does not return until the arrival of a S theme. Similarly, the
recapitulation of his Piano Sonata No. 1 begins in Eb major, the return of tonic key C major
Example 4.8 Central action and RT within the S2, and S3 (mm. 217-252)
F minor
95
F minor
S2 S3 R4
Melody Central Action1.2 RT S1:\P1.1 S1:\P1.2 fortspinnung R1:\P1
Nonetheless, the economical usage of motifs and the compressed length of Solo 3 (S3)
also conceal the onset of recapitulation from listeners. First, one could argue that the French
horns’ Retransition (RT) at measure 223 could be interpreted as Ritornello 3 (R3). However, the
96
extension of dominant chords begin from a preceding central action and the clarinet’s active role
places this RT into Solo 2 (S2) rotation; as a result, there is no Ritornello 3 (R3) in this particular
movement that would potentially help one to recognize the launch of S3. Furthermore, because
the thematic material of RT is based on the Primary Theme (R1:\P), the recapitulation still
upholds the continuance of melody even though it does not comprise R1:\P, and in fact, it would
be redundant to begin the recapitulation with R1:\P. Second, the S3 only consists of eighteen
measures, which is relatively short in comparison to its respective exposition. It tracks only parts
of S1:\P1.1 and S1:\P1.2 and moves on to a fortspinnung of the melodic material. Further, this
fortspinnung is not only used to shorten the length of S3 but it also generates more tension and
energy toward the arrival of tonic. As a whole, the S2 successfully merges to S3 by the
prolongation of the dominant chord, the omission of R3 avoids the redundancy of the double-
start recapitulation, and finally the fortspinnung provides a pathway to conclude the S3 and
The final ritornello (R4) is divided into two halves by the clarinet’s cadenza-like passage
(mm. 258-273). The orchestra first plays the second half of R1:\P1 and then the first part of it,
measures 12-16. This is another example demonstrating how Weber rearranged the order of
materials. Next, the clarinet brings the movement to its climax by the stream of trills in measures
266-273 and arrives on clarinet’s highest pitch of the movement before finally ending with the
S1’s TI material.
To summarize, the first movement of Carl Maria von Weber’s Clarinet Concerto Op. 73
exhibits several significant features. The length of R1 is rather brief, and Weber further recycled
the melodic and rhythmic motifs for all three zones—Primary Theme (P), Transition (TR), and
97
Closing (C)—and avoided periodic cadence. Another characteristic is the role of orchestral Tutti
Interjection (TI), which is used to articulate the S1:\P zone and to conclude the piece. Finally, the
Solo 2 (S2) proceeds to Solo 3 (S3) without a Ritornello 3 (R3) and the return of the tonic key
does not coincide with the restatement of S1:\P in the recapitulation. This concerto movement
closely resembles Vogler and Koch’s five-part plan (Subtype C)—three ritornellos and two solos
as shown in Example 4.9. The second solo section (S2) comprises both developmental space and
recapitulation, and there is no ritornello (R3) at the onset of the recapitulation. The formal
structure of this movement is provided in Diagram 4.1 below. This concerto remains popular
because of its splendid melodies and its contribution to clarinet repertoire, but one should also
Example 4.9 Subtype C in Weber’s Clarinet Concerto No. 1, Op. 73, 1st movement
Material from R1 and S1
R1 S1 R2 S2 [“S3”] R4
Soloist
Orchestra
i i III v IV, ii, bVII i i
98
Diagram 4.1 Carl Maria von Weber, Clarinet Concerto No. 1 Op. 73, 1st movement
Ritornello 1
Solo 1
S1:\P1.2 mm. 64-73 DC occurs at m. 70 and followed by the first PAC at m. 73.
TI mm. 73-83 F minor: F pedal. It is R1:\P based and the soloist is active in the
passage. It has important in rhetoric—it is used to close the
movement.
TR mm. 84-104 Db major. Lower strings play R1:\P which is juxtaposed with the
clarinet’s melody
S mm. 110-130 Ab major. Its melodic shape similar with S1:\P1.1. DC at m. 126.
DE1.2 m. 143
99
Ritornello 2
R1:\TR mm. 145-153 = mm. 34-35 (R1:\TR1.2); mm. 153-157 = mm. 26-29 (R1:\TR1.1)
Solo 2
Central action1.2 mm. 198-222 Gm-EbM-Fm. Woodwinds state R1:\P three times.
Solo 3
Ritornello 4
Ritornello 4.1 mm. 249-257 F minor: PAC. R1:\P1 based (mm. 16-24)
100
Section 2. Clarinet Concerto No. 2 in Eb Major, Op. 74
Weber’s second clarinet concerto was finished on July 12, 1811 and was first performed
The first movement of this concerto exemplifies the seven-part format (Subtype B) which
contains four ritornellos. The feature of this type is that Ritornello 3 (R3) functions as a
Example 4.10 Subtype B in Weber’s Clarinet Concerto No.2, Op.74, 1st movement
R1 S1 R2 S2 R3 S3 R4
Soloist
Orchestra
I I V V bVII ii I I I
The opening ritornello (R1) contrasts with Clarinet Concerto No. 1 sharply; first, it opens
zones of Primary Theme (R1:\P), Transition (R1:\TR), Medial Close (R1:\MC), Secondary
Theme (R1:\S), Essential Expositional Closure (EEC), and Closing (R1:\C). The R1:\P, as shown
in Example 4.11 below, is constructed chiefly from a dotted rhythm and a descending arpeggio,
with their fortissimo dynamic they produce a splendid sense. The succeeding R1:\TR can be
divided into two parts, TR1.1 and TR1.2. Although both parts feature scale-like passages, TR1.2 is
particularly interesting: first, Weber introduced a new melodic element—grace notes—to the
TR1.2. Additionally, the TR1.2 is unique to itself. It does not appear again anywhere else in this
movement (Ex. 4.11). The Transition space (TR) closes with a Medial Close (MC) at measure 26
and it is immediately followed by the Secondary Theme (R1:\S), which is not only lyrical in
contrast but it also has a playful attribute to the light dotted rhythmic figure and short tonal
101
span—Eb major to G minor and back to Eb major before reaching the EEC at measure 39. The
Closing zone (R1:\C) also has two small modules, C1.1 and C1.2; the latter is used in the
Ritornello 2 (R2).
Example 4.11 R1:\P; R1:\TR1.2 (mm. 18-26); and R1:\S (mm. 30-39)
R1:\P
The solo clarinet (S1) opens with a grand gesture, a S1:\Ppreface that encompasses the
clarino and chalumeau registers before the R1:\P is reiterated (Ex. 4.12). Importantly, this
102
operatic preface material is later played by the orchestra to launch Ritornello 2 (R2) and
Ritornello 3 (R3) at measures 137 and 192 respectively. Furthermore, Weber takes the first five
notes of this melody and elaborates them into the sujet libre type of Transition (TR) in measures
Example 4.12 S1:\Ppreface (mm. 50-53) and Sujet Libre type of TR within the S1(mm. 85-92)
The soloist continues to a statement of R1:\P theme (mm. 54-68), but the theme is played
in a soft dynamic and is divided between the orchestra and soloist. The R1:\P then elides with
Transition zone (TR) which first reminds the listener of R1:\TR1.1 melody, but quickly it
flourishes into a new extended melody and modulates to Bb major. This TR is an example of
sujet libre type of transition. At measure 77, the TR1.2 comprises two sequential phrases. Next,
TR1.3 at measure 85 outlines the first five notes of the S1:\Ppreface as demonstrated in above
Example 4.12. Finally, TR1.4 reconfirms Bb major by the establishment of the F dominant pedal
at measure 95 that later reaches the half cadence (HC) at measure 99.
103
The Secondary Theme (S, mm. 103-118) resembles the R1:\S theme except it is in the
dominant key—Bb major and it is also concluded with an Essential Expositional Closure (EEC)
at measure 118. The following Display Episode (DE) is rather expansive compared to Weber’s
First Clarinet Concerto. It comprises numerous arpeggios and scale-like passages with
challenging tonguing and articulation technique. Though Weber did not compose a DE in his
First Clarinet Concerto, Baermann did. This DE certainly showcases Baermann’s exceptional
skills and is much appreciated by any soloist. Nonetheless, this DE wraps up with the soloist’s
brilliant trills that collide with Ritornello 2 (R2). The R2 first emphasizes the S1:\Ppreface material,
then continues to the R1:\C1.2 element and a short linking passage (mm. 146-151) that serves a
Several features indicate the structure of Solo 2 (S2) is episodic, not rotational. Measures
melodies of the two phrases are new; however, they reflect the character of S1:\Ppreface and
Secondary Theme (S) respectively. The former phrase is marked grandioso, and like S1:\Ppreface
it encompasses a wide register range of the instrument. The latter phrase, measures 159-167,
labeled dolce exhibits both sweet timbre and S’s scherzando characteristic. Putting two such
characteristically different phrases side by side and creating a fantasy-like quality is the hallmark
of Weber as an opera composer, and this compositional style is frequently found in his piano
concertos.
104
Example 4.13 S2 Episodic (mm. 151-167)
antecedent consequence
antecedent
consequence
The scale of Solo 2 (S2) central action is undersized; it only lasts fourteen measures. As
shown in Example 4.14 the motif of central action comprises a segment of sixteenths first heard
at measures 14-15, R1:\TR1. In addition, this motif later plays an important role later in the
Retransition (RT). The central action zone is then concluded with a stream of trills that serves a
modulatory function—to modulate from Db major to Eb major via a German augmented sixth
chord. This chord further prepares the following RT zone that primarily builds on the dominant.
In the RT zone, the R1:\TR1’s sixteenths segment continues to spin out in the soloist part above
the orchestra’s Bb dominant pedal. It is noteworthy that the soloist remains active throughout the
RT until the moment of recapitulation returns at measure 192 which is led by the orchestra. To
summarize, S2 is highly compact; firstly, its episodic opening reflects the characters of
S1:\Ppreface and Secondary Theme; secondly, the short-lived central action is based on R1:\TR1’s
sixteenths figure that continues to develop in the RT zone; and thirdly, the RT is located in S2
105
Example 4.14 Central action (mm. 167-181); R1:\TR1 (mm. 14-15); RT (mm. 181-183)
RT (mm. 181-183)
Lead by the orchestral tutti, the recapitulation begins at measure 192 where Weber used
the S1:\Ppreface material rather than the R1:\P theme. The orchestra continues to the Closing
material (R1:\C), and then the initial Ritornello 3 (R3) orchestral texture merges into the solo
clarinet’s Secondary Theme (S) instead of backing up and restarting. This strategy avoids the
redundancy of the double-start recapitulation. According to Hepokoski and Darcy, this is the
most common option for the middle and later Mozart concertos, from Piano Concerto No. 6, K.
238 and onward, and it soon became the first-level-default option, especially in his piano
concertos.28 In addition, this R3 S3 merger has been discussed in literature with much debate
as to whether the R3 opening portion should qualify as a real ritornello or as merely a tutti
interjection. In Hepokoski and Darcy’s Sonata Theory, it is regard as a ritornello pillar R3.
28
Hepokoski and Darcy, 585.
106
Once the decision has been made to merge the soloist’s part (S3) into a recapitulation that
has begun with an orchestral ritornello gesture (R3), this may be accomplished in any number of
ways. In the first movement of Weber’s Second Clarinet Concerto, the R3 only repeats the
S1:\Ppreface and omits the Primary Theme (P) and Transition (TR) material, then continues to
R1:\C-based passages and Caesura-Fill figure (CF) from measure 29. When the soloist enters at
measure 205 in which the S3 begins, the Secondary Theme (S) is finally presented. It is clever of
Weber to insert the final part of CF right after the R1:\C at measure 204, because it provides a
seamless merger from R3 to S3 and evidently the S starts with the same prefix as in previous R1
and S1 spaces (Ex. 4.15). Moreover, the R3 persists with fourteen measures which are longer
than the norm. In Irving’s research, it is unusual for the R3 to be sustained without the soloist for
more than eight bars.29 The longest R3s, frequently cited in this regard, are those found in
Mozart’s Piano Concertos No. 21, K. 467 and No. 27, K. 595. At the other extreme, the shortest
are those in which the soloist enters within a bar or two of the onset of R3, namely, Mozart’s
Piano Concertos No. 6, K. 238; No. 15, K. 450; and No. 16, K. 451. Nonetheless, the R3 in
Weber’s Second Clarinet Concerto is longer than the average. It establishes its role as a R3
instead of merely just an orchestral tutti, and it further enables Weber to create a smooth R3
S3 merger.
R3 S3
29
John Irving, Mozart’s Piano Concertos (Hants, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2003), 50.
107
CF and S theme (mm. 29-30)
The following Solo 3 section (S3) reprises only the Secondary Theme (S). After reaching
the Essential Structural Closure (ESC) at measure 220, the Display Episode (DE1.1) material is
played in the closing space and continues to spin out: the length of this DE is greater than the one
within the S1. Finally, a brief Ritornello 4 (R4) concludes the first movement with a statement of
Overall, the design of the first movement of Weber’s Clarinet Concerto No. 2, Op. 74 is
grander than his First Clarinet Concerto, not only in the aspect of its formal structure, but also in
the performance technique required from the soloist and the usage of the instrument. This
movement consists of R1, S1, R2, S2, R3 S3 merger, and R4 with careful planning and
intriguing compositional ideas in each zone. Moreover, the lengthy TR and DE in S1 truly
showcase a soloist’s skill and the passages Weber composed indicate all registers of the clarinet
and the capability of the instrument at that time. This concerto was also played by Baermann’s
rival Hermstedt in Prague on the February 10 and 17, 1815, where Weber accompanied
108
Diagram 4.2 Carl Maria von Weber, Clarinet Concerto No. 2 Op. 74, 1st movement
Ritornello 1
R1:\P mm. 1-14 Eb major; begins with dynamic ff.
EEC m. 39 Eb:PAC
Solo 1
109
Ritornello 2
Solo 2
mm. 159-167
R3 S3
Ritornello 4
110
Section 3. Conclusion
Along with other Romantic composers, Carl Maria von Weber struggled to reconcile the
formal demands of classical first movement design with the ongoing development of Romantic
composing variations, small-scale concert pieces and rondos, but he did attempt to wrestle with
the sonata form by writing four piano sonatas, two symphonies, three piano concertos, two
Weber’s sonatas and sonata form is characterized by Kathleen Dale as “far from uniform
movements of the same kind of form resemble one another at all closely in outline. The works
are fascinating to study on account both of the many structural irregularities they display and of
the composer’s unending resourcefulness in treating his musical ideas.” Correspondingly, the
first movements of Weber’s two clarinet concertos echo Dale’s remark. The First Clarinet
Concerto’s first movement closely resembles Vogler and Koch’s five-part plan (subtype C)—
three ritornellos and two solos. On the other hand, the Ritornello 1 (R1) is free from the
constraint of the sonata expositional structure, and the Solo2 (S2) and Solo 3 (S3) are novel in
Second Clarinet Concerto’s first movement exemplifies the seven-part format (subtype B) which
contains four ritornellos and three solos. This concerto movement includes a R1 that serves
expositional-rhetoric and referential-layout functions, and a lavish Solo 1 (S1), which is followed
30
Kathleen Dale, Nineteenth Century Piano Music: A Handbook for Pianists (London: Da Capo Press,
1972), 45-6.
111
The slow movements of Weber’s concertos exhibit a variety of design and texture as well
and they further demonstrate the characteristics of Weber as an opera composer. In the First
Clarinet Concerto, the second movement features the solo clarinet with a French horn trio, and
this texture is later used again at the end of the movement. Additionally, the clarinet plays a
recitative passage in the second movement of Clarinet Concerto No. 2 that further dramatizes the
already cantabile melody. Finally, Weber seems to prefer to conclude the concerto with a rondo
movement; most of his concertos and sonatas finish with a rondo finale.
112
Chapter V
Conclusion
Hepokoski and Darcy’s Type 5 sonata is a result of studying the concertos by Haydn,
Mozart, Beethoven, several treatises of the theorists from the past, and current studies on sonata
form. It provides a general view on the structure of a concerto’s first movement, and offers ways
to understand how a composer constructs a concerto. Furthermore, the ample Sonata Theory
vocabularies and options enable a musician to describe the design of a concerto movement in
great detail.
After applying the Sonata Theory to the clarinet concertos by Spohr and Weber, the
analyses reveal the special features and distinguishing characteristics of each movement.
Moreover, they also demonstrate the composers’ preferences when writing a concerto and their
compositional styles. I hope this document brings additional insight to these concerto movements,
113
Appendix A. Terms and Abbreviations31
C = closing zone
CA = central action
CF = caesura-fill
DC = deceptive cadence
DE = display episode
EEC = essential expositional closure (within an exposition, usually the first satisfactory PAC that
occurs within S and that proceeds onward to differing material.)
ESC = essential structural closure (within a recapitulation, usually the first satisfactory PAC that
occurs within S and that proceeds onward to differing material.)
HC = half cadence
IAC = imperfect authentic cadence
MC = medial caesura
P = primary-theme zone
PAC = perfect authentic cadence
R1 = the initial ritornello (Ritornello 1 or opening tutti) at the opening of a Type 5 sonata
(concerto movement). Similarly, R2, R3, and R4 stand for the second, third, and forth
ritornellos (or tuttis), each of which also has a specialized function and role to play within
a Type 5 sonata.
R1:\ = prefix indicating material within R1 of a Type 5 sonata (concerto movement). (Thus R1:\P,
R1:\S, and R1:\EEC represent the modules functioning as the primary theme, the
secondary theme, and the rhetorical EEC within the opening tutti of a Type 5 sonata.)
RT = retransition
S = secondary-theme zone
S1 = the first solo section, Solo 1, of a Type 5 sonata (concerto movement), typically marked by
the first entrance of the soloist following the orchestral R1 and ending with a trill cadence
precipitating the onset of the second ritornello or tutti, R2.
S1:\ = prefix indicating material within the S1 zone of a Type 5 sonata. (Thus S1:\P, S1:\S, and
S1:\EEC represent the modules functioning as the primary theme, the secondary theme,
and the EEC within the Solo 1 space of a Type 5 sonata.)
TI = tutti interjection (in a Type 5 sonata, any brief, interrupting tutti impulse within what is
otherwise a solo section, such as S1, S2, or S3.)
TMB = trimodular block. Individual modules may be designated as TM1, TM2, and TM3.
TR = transition
= “becomes” or “merges into”
31
Hepokoski and Darcy, xxv-xxviii.
114
Appendix B. The Type 5 Sonata Default and Options
Diagram B.1 The Opening Ritornello
R1:\P
or;
“Motto” R1:\P as Idée Fixe
or later “Wild Card”
R1:\MC
with or without caesura-fill
no R1:\S R1:\S
Produce the continuous R1 It is frequently a
with no MC effect multimodular, therefore one
need to define which PAC is
the EEC
R1:\EEC
115
Diagram B.2 Solo and Larger Expositions: Solo 1 + Ritornello 2
R1:\C
S1:\TR
Sujet-libre transition type
and other types
w/o S1:\MC
116
Diagram B.3 Development and Recapitulation: From Solo 2 through Ritornello 4
Developmental Space:
S2 or S2 + “R3”
Overall shape
Event zones
Mitte zone
Central action An interior point where the initial activity
A modestly sized contral block of stabilizes, however briefly, usually into an
sequences with a display of rapid HC or a PAC, often in vi or iii, that
passagework from the soloist prepares the onset of the next section
RT in S2 Retransitional R3
option proceeding to
a solo-lead
recapitulation
117
Solo recapitulation:
S3, R3+S3, or R3═>S3
S3 R3+S3 R3═>S3
Recapitulation as rotation Double-start opening Merger opening
1-rotation 2 synthesis
Varying Solo-led (S3) It features a The R1 The solo recap. Several ways
relationships of opening decisive tutti “group”- begins with a of merger
the solo beginning that persona takes decisive tutti
recapitulation serves to mark an initially pillar
to S1 the structural charge then replicating the
moment of yields to the beginning of
recap. but then soloist for an R1:\P, but
gives way to a S1-based within a few
second, solo- rebeginning bars the soloist
led beginning with conditions re-enters to
that replicates assist with or to
the opening of take over its
S1 continuation
May be articulated only with the final S3:\ESC May occur earlier, in which case
trill-cadence, in which case there will the DE will have been played in C-
be no S3:\C-space; the DE will be space, perhaps even after the
part of S-space reappearance of a separate C-theme
R4
118
R4
Outfit R41 with Split the R2 music Begin with the The potential
differing material for R41 & R42 linkage-technique of rotational
and bring back the taking up material implications of the
R2-referential music, that had just been modular content
nearly always fully stated in the within those
intact, after the orchestra cadenzas that
cadenza, in R42 reconfigure
previously heard
material
Include R2 material
only in R41, leaving
R42 free to restore
previously “lost”
material from R1
119
Bibliography
Adelson, Robert. “New Perspectives on Performing Mozart’s Clarinet Concerto.” The Clarinet
25/2 (Feb.-Mar. 1998): 50-55.
Canazza, Sergio, Giovanni De Poli, Stefano Rinaldin, and Alvise Vidolin. “Sonological Analysis
of Clarinet Expressivity.” In Music, Gestalt, and Computing: Studies in Cognitive and
Systematic Musicology, ed. Marc Leman, 431-40. New York: Springer, 1997.
Davenport, Linda Gilbert. “Slurring versus Tonguing: Questional Articulation Practices in the
Mozart Clarinet Concerto.” The Quarterly Journal of Music Teaching and Learning 2/4
(Winter 1991): 38-41.
Deutsch, Otto Erich. Mozart’s Catalogue of His Works, 1784-1791. Facsimile. New York:
Herbert Reichner, 1956.
Etheridge, David. Mozart’s Clarinet Concerto: The Clarinetist’s View. Gretna, LA: Pelican Pub.
Co., 1983.
__________. “The Concerto for Clarinet in A Major, K.622, by W.A. Mozart: A Study of
Nineteenth and Twentieth-Century Performances and Editions.” D.M.A. thesis,
University of Rochester, 1973.
Irving, John. Mozart’s Piano Concerto. Hants, England: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2003.
Jackendoff, Ray. “The Proper Ending for the Slow Movement of the Mozart Concerto.” The
Clarinet 28/4 (Sept. 2001): 56-57.
Koons, Keith. “Recent Editions of the Mozart Clarinet Concerto.” The Clarinet 35/3 (June 2008):
34-37.
__________. “A Guide to Published Editions of Mozart’s Clarinet Concerto, KV. 622, for
Clarinet and Piano.” The Clarinet 25/3 (May-June 1998): 34-43.
Jahn, Otto. Life of Mozart. Translated by Pauline D. Townsend. 3 vols. London: Novello, Ewer
& Co., 1882.
Lawson, Colin. Mozart: Clarinet Concerto. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
120
Leeson, Daniel N. “A Proposed Change to the Text of Mozart’s Clarinet Concerto.” The Clarinet
32/4 (Sept. 2005): 60-63.
Pay, Antony. “Phrasing in Contention.” Early Music 24/2 (May 1996): 291-321.
Poulin, Pamela. “Anton Stadler’s Basset Clarinet: Recent Discoveries in Riga.” Journal of the
American Musical Instrument Society 22 (1996): 110-27.
Rice, Albert R. Review of Mozart: Clarinet Concerto, by Colin Lawson. The Galpin Society
Journal 50 (Mar. 1997): 284-87.
Sheveloff, Joel. “When Sources Seem to Fail: The Clarinet Parts in Mozart’s K.581 and K.622.”
In Critica Musica: Essays in Honor of Paul Brainard, ed. John Knowles, 379-401.
Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach, 1996.
Johnston, Stephen Keith. “The Clarinet Concertos of Louis Spohr.” DMA thesis, University of
Maryland, 1972.
Sturm, Jonathan Andrew. “The Evolution of a Dramatic Compositional Style in the Violin
Concertos of Louis Spohr.” DMA thesis, Indiana University, 1995.
Weston, Pamela. Clarinet Virtuosi of the Past. London: Robert Hale & Company, 1971.
Weston, Pamela. More Clarinet Virtuosi of the Past. London: Halstan & Co. Ltd., 1977.
Wulftorst, Martin. “Louis Spohr’s Early Chamber Music (1796-1812): A Contribution to the
History of Nineteenth-Century Genres.” PhD dissertation, City University of New York,
1995.
Chen, Mei-Chuan. “The Clarinet Music of Carl Maria von Weber.” D.M.A. thesis, University of
Maryland, 1999.
Heidlberger, Frank. “Carl Maria von Weber’s Clarinet Concerto: A Challenge to the Editor and
to the Clarinetist.” The Clarinet 30/1 (Dec. 2002): 50-61.
Lopez, Richard Clarence. “The Piano Concertos of Carl Maria von Weber: Precursors of the
Romantic Piano Concerto.” D.M.A. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1989.
Murray, Lauren Baker. “The Nineteenth Century Oboe Concertino: An Overview of Its Structure
with Two Performance Guides.” D.M.A. thesis, University of North Texas, 2002.
121
Wray, Ronnie Everett. “A Survey of Discrepancies among Solo Parts of Editions and
Manuscripts of Carl Maria von Weber’s Concerto No.1 in F Minor, Op.73.” D.M.A.
thesis, Louisiana State University, 1991.
Tusa, Michael C. “In Defense of Weber.” In Nineteenth-Century Piano Music, 2d ed., ed. R.
Larry Todd, 147-177. New York and London: Routledge, 2004.
Concerto Analyses
-primary resource
Hepokoski, James, and Warren Darcy. Elements of Sonata Theory: Norms, Types, and
Deformations in the Late-Eighteenth-Century Sonata. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2006.
Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus. Concerto in A Major, K. 622. Edited by Stanley Drucker. New
York: International Music Company, 1959.
Spohr, Ludwig. Concerto No. 1 Op. 26. Edited by Stanley Drucker. New York: International
Music Company, 1965.
Spohr, Ludwig. Concerto No. 2 Op. 57. Edited by Stanley Drucker. New York: International
Music Company, 1965.
Spohr, Ludwig. Concerto No. 3. Edited by Stanley Drucker. New York: International Music
Company, 1965.
Spohr, Ludwig. Concerto No. 4. Edited by Stanley Drucker. New York: International Music
Company, 1965.
Weber, von Carl Maria. Concerto No. 1 Op. 73. Edited by Reginald Kell. New York:
International Music Company, 1958.
Weber, von Carl Maria. Concerto No. 2 Op. 74. Edited by Reginald Kell. New York:
International Music Company, 1958.
Benjamin, William. “Mozart: Piano Concerto No.17 in G Major, K.453, Movement I.” In
Analytical Studies in World Music, ed. Michael Tenzer, 332-76. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2006.
122
Keefe, Simon P. “The Stylistic Significance of the First Movement of Mozart’s Piano Concerto
No.24 in C Minor, K.491: A Dialogic Apotheosis.” Journal of Musicological Research
18/3 (July 1999): 225-261.
Wen, Eric. “Enharmonic Transformation in the First Movement of Mozart’s Piano Concerto in C
minor, K.491.” In Schenker Studies, ed. Hedi Siegel, 107-24. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1990.
Agawu, Victor Kofi. “Mozart’s Art of Variation: Remarks on the First Movement of K.503.” In
Mozart’s Piano Concertos: Text, Context, Interpretation, ed. Neal Zaslaw, 303-13. Ann
Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1996.
Kimbell, David R. B. “Variation Form in the Piano Concertos of Mozart.” The Music Review
44/2 (Mar. 1983): 95-103.
Sisman, Elaine. “Form, Characted, and Genre in Mozart’s Piano Concerto Variations.” In
Mozart’s Piano Concertos: Text, Context, Interpretation, ed. Neal Zaslaw, 335-61. Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996.
Kinderman, William. “Dramatic Development and Narrative Design in the First Movement of
Mozart’s Concerto in C minor, K.491.” In Mozart’s Piano Concertos: Text, Context,
Interpretation, ed. Neal Zaslaw, 285-301. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press,
1996.
Levy, Janet M. “Contexts and Experience: Problems and Issues.” In Mozart’s Piano Concertos:
Text, Context, Interpretation, ed. Neal Zaslaw, 139-48. Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan Press, 1996.
Wedster, James. “Are Mozart’s Concertos ‘Dramatic’? Concerto Ritornellos versus Aria
Introductions in the 1780s.” In Mozart’s Piano Concertos: Text, Context, Interpretation,
ed. Neal Zaslaw,107-37. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996.
Heim, Norman M. The Clarinet Concerto in Outline. Hyattsville, MD: Norcat Music Press, 1997.
123
Irving, John. Mozart’s Piano Concertos. England; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2003.
Keefe, Simon P. “Greatest Effects with the Least Effort: strategies of wind writing in Mozart’s
Viennese piano concertos.” In Mozart Studies, ed. Simon P. Keefe, 25-46. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2006.
__________, ed. The Cambridge Companion to the Concerto. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2005.
__________. “The Concertos in Aesthetic and Stylistic Context.” In The Cambridge Companion
to Mozart, ed. Simon P. Keefe, 78-91. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
__________. “An Entirely Special Manner: Mozart’s Piano Concerto No.14 in E flat, K.449, and
the Stylistic Implications of Confrontation.” Music & Letters 82/4 (Nov. 2001): 559-81.
McKee, Eric. “Extended Anacruses in Mozart’s Instrumental Music.” Theory and Practice 29
(2004): 1-37.
Mirka, Danuta. “The Cadence of Mozart’s Cadenzas.” The Journal of Musicology 22/2 (Spring
2005): 292-325.
Rumph, Stephen. “Mozart’s Archaic Endings: A Linguistic Critique.” Journal of the Royal
Musical Association 130/2 (2005): 159-96.
Dale, Kathleen. Nineteenth Century Piano Music: A Handbook for Pianists. London: Da Capo
Press, 1972.
Garvin, Florence Hollister. The Beginnings of the Romantic Concerto. New York: Vantage Press
Inc., 1952.
124
Lindeman, Stephan D. Structural Novelty and Tradition in the Early Romantic Piano Concerto.
Stuyvesant: Pendragon Press, 1999.
__________. “An Insular World of Romantic Isolation: Harmonic Digressions in the Early
Nineteenth-Century Piano Concerto.” Ad Parnassum: A Journal of Eighteenth- and
Nineteenth-Century Instrumental Music 4/8 (Oct. 2006): 21-80.
Macdonald, Claudia. “Mozart’s Piano Concertos and the Romantic Generation.” In Historical
Musicology: Sources, Methods, Interpretation, ed. Stephen A. Crist and Robert
Montemorra Marvin, 302-29. Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 2004.
125