This education blog shares various horizons of music in order to promote sustainable development of music education. Being devoted to music education for 19 years, Carol Ng has established her private studio at Adelaide, South Australia with an examination-standard Yamaha grand piano. In addition, Carol is keen on enlightening the next generation and advocating continuous advancement of music industry.

教育BLOG旨在推廣音樂教育發展,讓更多人認識不同的音樂領域;吳老師投身音樂教育十九年,於南澳洲的阿得萊德開設私人教室,並採用符合考試標準之Yamaha 三角琴教學,致力培育新一代音樂學好者及推動音樂行業的持續發展。

顯示具有 About Theories 樂理篇 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 About Theories 樂理篇 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2015年10月8日 星期四

The Story Of The Establishment Of Standard Pitch

tuning forks 001 (478x640).jpg
For a clear understanding of why establishing a standard pitch was so important, I have outlined a short history of the trend of pitch over a period of nearly two centuries. The information up to about 1880 was taken from “Helmoltz’s Sensation of Tone”. From that time to just prior to the establishment of a standard pitch (1925), I took the data as presented by Richard Kamperman president of the former organization of piano technicians, known as the National Association of Piano Tuners to create the following scenario:

“The members of the National Association of Piano Tuners (NAPT), were the authors of the resolution that brought about the end of the chaos that existed in the matter of musical pitch prior to June 11, 1925.

“Historical pitches from the lowest to the highest: (there were other pitches used during these periods, but the following pitches exerted influence only at their particular institutions and on persons in the same musical environment). It is interesting to note the steady rise of pitch of the various tuning forks.

PITCH YEAR DESCRIPTION
A-384.3 1700 A tuning fork of an early church, origin unknown.
A-423.5 1751 Fork of Handel
A-415.0 1754 Roman Catholic church organ in Dresden.
A-420.1 1780 Winchester College organ.
A-421.6 1780 Fork of Stein, who made Mozart’s pianos and forks.
A-424.6 1800 Dr. Steiner’s fork, used in Plymouth Theater
A-427.0 1811 Paris Grand Opera
A-433.0 1820 London fork, approved by Sir Geo. Smart, conductor of Philharmonic concerts.
A-434.0 1829 Paris Opera.
A-435.0 1829 Dresden Opera.
A-436.5 1834 Vienna Opera.
A-440.2 1834 Stuttgart pitch, Scheibler fork.
A-436.0 1846 London Philharmonic.
A-435.4 1859 Pitch adopted by Vienna congress.
A-443.5 1859 Brunswick opera.
A-435.9 1868 Mason & Hamlin’s French pitch, also Ritchie’s standard pitch (USA)
A-448.2 1869 Leipzig, official fork of Society of Arts.
A-437.3 1872 Pitchler’s fork, tuned pianos for the Berlin opera.
A-451.1 1874 Belgian Army pitch, in 1880, Chickering’s standard NY pitch.
A-455.1 1877 Wagner festivals in London.
A-457.2 1879 Steinway’s fork, New York pitch.
A-450.9 1880 Boston Music Hall, USA.
A-458.0 1880 Steinway’s fork, New York.

The trend of the rise in pitch really began at the congress of Vienna in 1814, when the emperor of Russia presented new and sharper band instruments to an Austrian regiment, of which he was colonel. The band of this regiment became noted for the brilliancy of its tone. In 1820 another Austrian regiment received instruments that were sharper still, and the theaters were greatly dependent upon the bands of the home regiments for the source of their music, they were obliged to adopt the pitches of the regimental bands. Gradually at Vienna the pitch rose from A-421.6 (Mozart’s pitch) to A-456.1, This was the pitch that the Theodore Thomas orchestra used in Cincinnati in 1880.

The mania spread throughout Europe; pitch was on the rise, but at very different rates. When the pitch reached A-448 at the Paris Opera in 1858, the music world took flight. The emperor of France appointed a commission to select a pitch, whose findings brought forth a pitch fork called Diapason Normal, which was found to be A-435.4. This fork was, at the time, preserved at the Paris Conservatory of Music. At the great Vienna Congress in 1885, this pitch was advocated to be adopted as Standard Pitch, and in the United States some of the eastern piano manufacturers did adopt that pitch and began to tune their pianos to it in 1892. Up to the time of this international congress in Vienna, many different pitches had been in use. In this country the so called concert pitch was used, but with the variations of anywhere from A-452 to A-458. Although at the international congress in Vienna in 1885 the pitch of A-435 was recognized, it was not adopted everywhere immediately.

This pitch the Vienna congress adopted was the French Diapason Normal, as it was approved by the commission appointed by the emperor of France in 1858, and adopted in 1859; A-435.4 at a temperature of 59 degrees Fahrenheit. Two important factors were specified, the number of vibrations and the degree of temperature. Those two factors must be considered together, as they are directly related.

The fact that musical programs are rendered under different temperature conditions than formerly, exerted an important influence upon the adoption of our present day pitch of A-440. Concert halls and other public places were not heated as they are today. There were large churches in Europe which were not heated at all. As the halls and churches were heated to ever higher temperatures the pitch of the wind instruments went up. Wind instruments tuned to A-435 at 59 degrees F. will go up in pitch to A-440 when played in a hall heated to 72 degrees F, but the piano in turn does not go to A-440, but has a tendency to flatten.

So since we do not play in cool halls of 59 degrees, but more likely at 72 degrees, and since the workmen in instrument making factories work in warmer temperatures closer to 72, it is much simpler to use an A-440 fork in the production of orchestral instruments. Piano manufacturers must consider tension, weight, and lengths of various sizes of wire used in the scale of their pianos, in order to secure a proper balance of the high tension of the wires at the recognized number of vibrations and temperature conditions.

The American Federation of Musicians finally recognized the effect of temperature on A-435 tuned instruments and at its national convention in 1917 adopted the pitch of A-440. But even at that date there was no conformity in this country. High concert pitched instruments were in use in many sections and professional musicians were compelled to use two sets of instruments in their various engagements (high and low pitch). Brass instruments were built in high pitch and provided with low pitch slides, and when used with these slides for the lowering of pitch, the intonation of the instruments became faulty, dependent on the skill of the performer to “lip” them in tune.

Outside of the aforementioned eastern piano makers who adopted A-435 in 1892, piano makers used a different pitch source according to their own ideas of pitch. Organs were tuned to the favorite pitch of the choir leader rather than to a standard, and as for pianos, their pitch varied from “high concert” to a little under A-435. In those days, if the piano tuner was not informed by the piano owner or a player as to the desired pitch they wished to have their piano tuned, it was tuned to the prevailing pitch at the time of servicing, whatever that was. Since there was no set standard, opinions continued to vary and those tuners who had forks set to the Vienna congress (A-435), gave up their use because these forks were rarely in agreement with the pitch demanded. Such were the contradictions existing in the chaotic world of pitch prior to the adoption of A-440 at 68 degrees fahrenheit.
In 1925 a standard pitch was established. Through what means was it established? What force made it possible to establish and maintain a set standard pitch? Out of all groups who were subjected to the contradictions existing in pitch, those confronting the piano tuners were the greatest. It was only natural therefore, that from this source an
attempt would be made to reach an agreement on pitch standard.

Upon the occasion of the 15th National Convention of the National Association of Piano Tuners, Inc. at Milwaukee in 1924, its membership passed a resolution calling for the standardization of pitch. It reads as follows:

WHEREAS members of this association are vitally interested in the question of a standard of musical pitch, and
WHEREAS a most deplorable confusion now exists in regard to this standard, as among manufacturers, musicians, tuners and the musical world in general, and further
WHEREAS attempts have been made by various groups to commit the musical world generally to a new standard, therefore be it
RESOLVED that this association, as directly and vitally interested, both theoretically and practically, in this question, declares it to be one which no group save one representing every interest in the world of music - artistic, scientific, and commercial - can possibly be competent to decide; further be it
RESOLVED that this association, desiring to do what it can do to clarify the present dangerous and deplorable confusion in the standard of pitch, hereby directs its president to communicate with the Music Industry Chamber of Commerce, informing that body that this association desires to have called together a national conference representing the interests of manufacturers of all musical instruments, musicians, tuners, and the United States Government, which may explore the whole question and make upon it an authoritive (sic) and final pronouncement to the end that a satisfactory standard of musical pitch may be forever established; lastly be it
RESOLVED that the membership of the National Association of Piano Tuners pledges itself faithfully to observe all technical requirements of such a standard when it has been authoritavely (sic) adopted and established.

Mr. Richard Lawrence, then president of the Music Industries Chamber of Commerce, was so impressed with the importance and the seriousness of the proposal that he appointed a committee to look into the practicality of it and named the president of the National Association of Piano Tuners, Charles Deutchman, as chairman of that committee.

It was indeed an exhaustive study, too long to be recounted here, as to the discussions and meetings that were performed in pursuit of standard pitch. In short, all affected branches of the Music Industries were represented and every possible point of view presented. Questionnaires were mailed out and answers were received with commendable promptness from all affected parties. It was apparent from the first that all concerned were conscious of the importance of the matter and also recognized the great need for action. Considering the vastness of their task, the committee arrived at their proposal in a very short time. Their recommendation? A-440 at 68 degrees Fahrenheit.

However, the labors of the committee were not over, for this same committee was then authorized to supervise the construction of a set of absolutely accurate standard tuning forks for A-440 at 68 Degrees Fahrenheit; said forks to represent the pitch known as A4, being the A above middle C on the keyboard, or the second space of treble clef. These forks were to be three in number - one to be deposited in the U.S. Bureau of Standards in Washington DC, one to be deposited in the central office of the Music Industries Chamber of Commerce, and one with the National Headquarters of the National Association of Piano Tuners, Inc. It was decided that there was need for an additional C fork of the corresponding pitch, rated at 523.23 because of the general practice at that time of most of the tuners of the NAPT using that as its starting point for laying the bearings. The ratings of these master forks was entrusted to Dr. Dayton Miller of the Case School of Applied Sciences, who also was the president of the American Physical Society, whose acoustical laboratory was the most complete in the US for the work at hand. The Case School was also appointed the task of comparison and correction of said forks. It can be said that, to the credit of the entire industry, without exception, they all complied promptly, submitting their forks for corrections.

Instrument makers were forced to spend considerably to make their instruments conform to the new standard. The organ and piano builders, not so much. We do not realize what an enormous task it was to accomplish the standard of musical pitch that we have today, and what they had to go through to complete the task. This article will put into some perspective that task which was successfully implemented.
 
Writer: Vincent
From "My Piano Friend"
 
An Introduction to Music Theory Pt 1- Pitch
 
 
Where Music Meet Science Part 1: Pitch and Frequency
 

2015年10月2日 星期五

調性(Tonality)

調性(Tonality)簡單的講就是24個大小調。然而這是如何產生的呢?首先我們應該對音階要有所認識。

基本上西洋音樂是以七聲音階為基礎,大家從五線譜上就可以了解,音符照著線與間的順序排列,所得到的便只有C,D,E,F,G,A,B七個不同的音名。然而之前曾提到一般所使用的共有十二個不同的音,那是因為以上七個音,其音與音之間的音程距離並非都是半音。以C大調為例,C,D,E,F,G,A,B,C*的排列除E,F與B,C*之間是半音音程外,其餘各音之間的音程都是全音。

大家要知道古典音樂從巴洛克時期一直到目前為止,絕大部分的創作是以調性音樂為主。現代音樂中雖然有非調性(atonal)音樂的產生,但基本上大家還是習慣接受調性音樂。而流行音樂更是仍無法跳脫調性音樂的規範。

為什麼會這樣呢?舉例來說,一個人從家中出去,不論去多遠的地方、或是要離開多久,最後總應該再回到家裏。

調性音樂中每個調子裏最重要的便是主音(tonic),樂曲通常由主音或主和弦開始,結束時又將回到主音或主和弦。此種模式最重要的意義在於使音樂進行具有強烈的方向感。
這種方向感的來源就在於音階的排列上。我們稱二音符間的距離為音程,如果一個音階裏各音符間的音程相同,也就可以說它們之間的距離是一樣,沒有親疏之分。如此便缺乏一種趨勢,自然也沒有進行的方向可言。因此我們可以了解大小調中那二組半音音程位置的重要性。

以下將音階中各音名稱順序列出:主音(tonic)、上主音(supertonic)、中音(mediant)、下屬音(subdominant)、屬音(dominant)、下中音(submediant)、導??leading tone)、八度音(octave)。
由此可知十二個音各自能成為一個調的主音,如此將得到十二個大調與十二個小調,總共便是所稱的二十四個大小調。

自《印象三重奏團》


Troubles with Tonal Terminology - 1: What (the hell) is "tonality"? 

2015年10月1日 星期四

不同樂器 各有各好

安排孩子學哪種樂器十分傷腦筋,家長可留意不同樂器在演奏方法上都有不同,故長時間練習某一種樂器對不同方面的發展都有好處。
 
我們以西樂的樂器家族分類為例:
 
弦樂器(Strings)
例如:小提琴、中提琴
著重使用手部的力度拉奏,從而訓練做大一點的動作,有助大小肌肉發展。
 
木管樂器(Woodwind)
例如:長笛、單簧管、雙簧管
著重運氣的吹奏方法,可幫助孩子調適呼吸。其中一些樂器例如雙簧管,需要比較多的呼吸技巧,一般而言大一點的兒童才能掌握得到技巧;木管樂多機會合奏,訓練團結性。
 
銅管樂器(Brass)
例如:法國號、小號、低音號
體積大、音量雄厚的銅管樂器,適合大一點的兒童;銅管樂合奏機會多,也有助訓練團體合作精神。
 
敲擊樂器(Percussion)
例如:鼓、木琴
敲擊樂可訓練節奏感,及身體各部位協調的能力。
 
鍵盤樂器(Keyboard)
例如:鋼琴、管風琴
講求左右手協調能力,有效練習小肌肉。
 
轉載自《 Babynews 親子雜誌》(2013-03-14  )
 
 


Young Person's Guide to Orchestra pt1

 
 
Young Person's Guide to Orchestra pt2
 

2015年9月30日 星期三

帶您聽懂「奏鳴曲式」!

如果您常去聽古典音樂會,您一定曾經在節目單裡看過「奏鳴曲」這三個字,但整場音樂會聽下來,您可能也不覺得那首「奏鳴曲」跟其他的曲子有什麼不一樣,所有的曲子不都是演「奏」之後就會「鳴」出來了嗎?

其實,一開始還真的就是這樣

「奏鳴曲」(sonata,複數為 sonate)這個字,是從拉丁文和意大利文的動詞「sonare」變來的,而 sonare 基本上就是「發出聲音」的意思,所以人們最一開始使用「奏鳴曲」這個詞的意思,就是泛指「所有經過演奏(而非唱歌)而發出聲音」的曲子,到古典時期之前都是這樣。
到了大約十八世紀中期,「奏鳴曲」這個詞有了更精確的意思,要稱作「奏鳴曲」的曲子,必須包含兩個條件:第一,它必須是「鋼琴獨奏、或鋼琴與另一樂器的二重奏」;第二,它必須有「超過一個樂章」。
關於奏鳴曲的事情先到這裡打住,如果您回頭看一下這篇文章的標題,您會發現我今天的任務其實是帶您聽懂奏鳴「曲式」,而不是奏鳴「曲」。就像「泰國芭樂」是「芭樂」而不是「泰國」的道理一樣,「奏鳴曲式」是一種古典時期之後,在奏鳴曲、協奏曲或交響曲的第一樂章中最常見的「曲式」、一種曲子段落安排的方式,而不是一種樂曲,小心別把這些名詞們搞混了。

就像是電影劇本一樣

我覺得,最簡單能讓您體會奏鳴曲式的方法,大概就是將它比喻成一個電影劇本了。
回想您最近看過的任一部電影,它在最一開始的時候在做什麼?絕大部份的電影在最開始都會交代一下故事的時間背景,以及讓主角們登場。主角通常很少會只有一個,就算是連《浩劫重生》(Cast Away)和《少年 Pi 的奇幻漂流》(Life of Pi)這種一個人獨自在孤島或海上漂流的戲碼,也都還是至少會有兩個或以上的主要角色(《浩劫重生》裡有排球 Wilson;《少年 Pi》裡是老虎 Parker)。而且電影在一開始通常也會很鮮明地描述主角們的個性和價值觀,所以觀眾可以期待他們在接下來發生的劇情中,會怎麼處理事情。
主角都登場之後,接下來就是要來發展劇情了。主角們會歷經一場愛情故事、奇幻冒險、戰爭、間諜行動、三角戀情、生離死別之類的。在這段期間內,主角們之間會有很多互動,會遇到他們從來沒有遇到過的事情,去很多他們自己意想不到的地方。
電影接近尾聲時,焦點會再度回到主角本身,在歷經一大堆愛恨交織、血淚情仇之後,主角們的內心通常也會受到事件的影響,有了成長或改變。也許是原本青澀的,後來變得世故;又或是原本懦弱的變得堅強,最後再用一個漂亮有梗的方式收尾。

奏鳴曲式的三個階段

一個奏鳴曲式的樂章,差不多就像上面說的那樣。我們有一個第一階段稱為「呈示部」(exposition),在呈示部當中會出現兩個(通常個性上有對比的)調性明確的主題。然後第二階段我們稱「發展部」(development),在呈示部中出現過的主題,會以各種意想不到的方式互動,並不斷轉調來強化緊張度。最後一個階段則是「再現部」(recapitulation),這時呈示部的兩個主題將再次出現,但第二主題的調性會與剛開始時不同,最後再用個尾奏來達成具有說服力的結尾。

呈示部,兩段個性完全不同的主題

Wiwi 這次為您挑選的例子,是莫札特非常有名的《G 小調第四十號交響曲》的第四樂章,這個樂章的結構就是一個超級標準的、教科書型的奏鳴曲式。曲子的最一開始,就是第一主題的登場。
第一主題 我們的主角一號(第一主題),一開始由輕巧、向上的斷奏音型開始,但兩小節後就突然轉強,然後又突然轉弱,又突然轉強,整段都充滿著重音和力度突然轉換,加上調性上又是小調,聽起來應該是個暴躁的角色,我們暫時假裝它是個脾氣兇狠的大叔。(什麼?您覺得這段音樂明明就很優美,一點都不暴躁阿!相信我,以 1788 年當時的標準來說,這個已經相當暴躁了。)主角一號這麼暴躁的話,我們的主角二號在個性上應該就要有強烈的對比,才能達成平衡。
第二主題主角二號(第二主題)果然如我們預期般地、與主角一號的個性完全不同。整段音樂是在大調,節奏感沒有那麼強烈,力度上也柔弱許多,感覺像是個天真無邪、出場時背景還會有花朵的可愛小妹妹。


聽眾需要時間來轉換情緒

暴躁大叔和可愛小妹妹這兩個高對比的主題,如果是緊接在一起出場的話,聽眾可能會來不及轉換情緒,所以通常奏鳴曲式在兩個主題中間,都會插入一段「連接段落」(transition)。而在第二主題結束之後,會再用一小段額外的音樂來結束整個呈示部,我們稱之為「小尾奏」(codetta)。連接段落跟小尾奏的音樂,通常都沒有明確好記的旋律,所以我們比較不會把這兩個中介段落跟主題混淆。
我們現在來聽一次完整的呈示部,您將會依序聽到「第一主題」、「連接段落」、「第二主題」和「小尾奏」,試試看您能不能辨識每一個段落吧!
整個呈示部這就是一個奏鳴曲式樂章的的第一個階段 – 「呈示部」。一般來說,整個呈示部會重複兩次,所以你才比較能夠記得主角長什麼樣子,不過並不是所有的演奏版本都會這樣做。

然後未知的冒險就要展開了!

在呈示部裡,把兩個主題都完整介紹過之後,下一步就是主角們要開始奇幻的冒險了!在奏鳴曲式裡,我們把這個部分叫做「發展部」,發展部的重點,就是要將你剛剛聽過的主題,除了加入新的素材外,並用各種作曲手法(包括轉調、重疊、改變聲部結構、模進等等)延伸它們。另外一個發展部的特色是調性會非常不穩定,你幾乎很難在發展部當中聽到一個明確的終止式。調性一直不確定,會累積聽眾的緊張感,讓聽眾一直期待緊張感到底什麼時候才能釋放掉。
因為這首曲子的整個發展部,幾乎都是建立在第一主題的音型上,所以您一定要先跟這個主題很熟,您才比較容易聽懂接下來莫札特在做什麼。我現在先用鋼琴彈第一主題的第一句給您聽,請播放以下的音樂檔超過五次(拜託,別偷懶),把這個音型深深印在您的頭腦裡。
呈示部第一主題鋼琴版
發展部的一開頭,第一主題的音型再次出現,但後面馬上接到了一些奇怪的音。

呈示部第一主題接下來的音樂,莫札特將第一主題的音型一下子放在高音(長笛)、一下子中音(弦樂)、一下子低音(低音管),也稍微相互重疊,好像在東奔西跑搜尋著什麼,卻又找不著的感覺。
重疊部然後莫札特決定要緬懷一下巴洛克時期的音樂,所以他將第一主題的音型延伸,寫了一小段很類似巴哈賦格的音樂。
多聲部再接下來,莫札特繼續堆疊第一主題的音型,這一次排列的時間差更加緊密,和聲上也更加緊張,音樂似乎進入了最慌亂的狀態。
第二次重疊之後,散落在高低各聲部的第一主題音型,好像比較合群了起來,開始有了一致的節奏,決定朝向一個特定的方向去。
比較合群這一連串的混亂終於接近尾聲,莫札特最後用鏗鏘有力的五個和弦,把壓力全部釋放掉⋯⋯了嗎?
假終止


你以為要結束了,但是還沒有⋯⋯

什麼?主角們原本覺得已經打敗大魔王、冒險已經結束了,但沒想到大魔王居然還沒死!莫札特在這裡運用的手法稱為「假終止」,簡單地說就是寫作一串和弦序列,讓聽眾覺得一段音樂即將要結束了,但卻在最後一個音用了意想不到的和弦,大家預期的結尾並沒有發生。
我接下來彈兩個片段,第一個是如果真的要結束的話應該要使用的和弦,第二個則是莫札特在此處使用的假終止。
真終止,鋼琴

因為剛剛的終止是假的,所以莫札特決定繼續第三次堆疊第一主題的音型,讓主角們繼續奮戰,這一次在段落最後,停在一個聽起來很像「還沒結束」的和弦。
發展部,最後一段
總結來說,整個發展部的內容就是利用各種莫札特想到的方式,堆砌第一主題的音型(可憐的第二主題,在發展部裡被冷落了),中間做了一個假結尾之後繼續堆砌第一主題,最後結束在一個未完成的和弦,仿佛在問「結果怎麼樣了呢?」的感覺。我們現在來聽一次完整的發展部,看看您能不能辨識出我剛剛提過的每一個細節。
整個發展部


所以⋯⋯結果到底怎麼樣了呢?

終於,一分多鐘的混亂總算結束,我們再度聽到了最初第一主題(熟悉)的聲音,終於可以鬆一口氣了!這就是奏鳴曲式的最後一個階段 – 「再現部」。曲子一開始的主題再現,冒險結束,主角的生活終於回歸正常。
再現部的流程,基本上和呈示部一樣,都是「第一主題→連接段落→第二主題→尾奏」的順序。
詳細地來看,再現部第一主題與呈示部時幾乎相同,除了缺少反覆外,完全沒有其他修改;但原本很優美快樂的第二主題,因為在發展部的時候都沒有到莫札特用到,所以第二主題不太開心,就在再現部時變成有點憂鬱的小調了。(?!)
很顯然地,第二主題後來變成小調當然不是這個原因(笑),而是因為奏鳴曲式有一個固定的轉調模式,不過在這篇文章不適合扯到複雜的樂理問題。

因為第二主題的調性不同,所以前面的連接段落也連帶稍微做了一些調整;而第二主題之後的尾奏,也因為要用來結束一整個交響曲,莫札特將它加長了一些,讓結尾更具說服力。

從頭到尾,整個樂章聽一次!


以上,這就是一個奏鳴曲式樂章的必經路程,最後我們來不間斷地聽一次整個樂章吧,我會在音樂進行當中,指出每一個我在本文提到的段落,也謝謝您收看這篇文章囉!

自《WIWI STUDIO》

2013年6月3日 星期一

帶您聽懂「奏鳴曲式」!(三)

作者- Wiwi 官大為



在呈示部裡,把兩個主題都完整介紹過之後,下一步就是主角們要開始奇幻的冒險了!在奏鳴曲式裡,我們把這個部分叫做「發展部」,發展部的重點,就是要將你剛剛聽過的主題,除了加入新的素材外,並用各種作曲手法(包括轉調、重疊、改變聲部結構、模進等等)延伸它們。另外一個發展部的特色是調性會非常不穩定,你幾乎很難在發展部當中聽到一個明確的終止式。調性一直不確定,會累積聽眾的緊張感,讓聽眾一直期待緊張感到底什麼時候才能釋放掉。

因為這首曲子的整個發展部,幾乎都是建立在第一主題的音型上,所以您一定要先跟這個主題很熟,您才比較容易聽懂接下來莫札特在做什麼。我現在先用鋼琴彈第一主題的第一句給您聽,請播放此音樂檔超過五次(拜託,別偷懶),把這個音型深深印在您的頭腦裡。

發展部的一開頭,第一主題的音型再次出現,但後面馬上接到了一些奇怪的音。聽下面的兩個音樂片段,我們來比較呈示部時的第一主題與發展部的開頭有什麼不同。

如同剛剛我彈給您聽的,第一主題原本應該長這樣:
但在發展部時變成這樣,接到了很詭異的音了對不對?
接下來的音樂,莫札特將第一主題的音型一下子放在高音(長笛)、一下子中音(弦樂)、一下子低音(低音管),也稍微相互重疊,好像在東奔西跑搜尋著什麼,卻又找不著的感覺。

然後莫札特決定要緬懷一下巴洛克時期的音樂,所以他將第一主題的音型延伸,寫了一小段很類似巴哈賦格的音樂。

再接下來,莫札特繼續堆疊第一主題的音型,這一次排列的時間差更加緊密,和聲上也更加緊張,音樂似乎進入了最慌亂的狀態。

之後,散落在高低各聲部的第一主題音型,好像比較合群了起來,開始有了一致的節奏,決定朝向一個特定的方向去。

這一連串的混亂終於接近尾聲,莫札特最後用鏗鏘有力的五個和弦,把壓力全部釋放掉......了嗎?

什麼?主角們原本覺得已經打敗大魔王、冒險已經結束了,但沒想到大魔王居然還沒死!莫札特在這裡運用的手法稱為「假終止」,簡單地說就是寫作一串和弦序列,讓聽眾覺得一段音樂即將要結束了,但卻在最後一個音用了意想不到的和弦,大家預期的結尾並沒有發生。


我接下來彈兩個片段,第一個是如果真的要結束的話應該要使用的和弦,第二個則是莫札特在此處使用的假終止。

如果真的要結束(真終止)的話,應該要像這樣:
但莫札特在這裡(假終止)寫成這樣:
因為剛剛的終止是假的,所以莫札特決定繼續第三次堆疊第一主題的音型,讓主角們繼續奮戰,這一次在段落最後,停在一個聽起來很像「還沒結束」的和弦。

總結來說,整個發展部的內容就是利用各種莫札特想到的方式,堆砌第一主題的音型(可憐的第二主題,在發展部裡被冷落了),中間做了一個假結尾之後繼續堆砌第一主題,最後結束在一個未完成的和弦,仿佛在問「結果怎麼樣了呢?」的感覺。我們現在來聽一次完整的發展部,看看您能不能辨識出我剛剛提過的每一個細節。

所以......結果到底怎麼樣了呢?

終於,一分多鐘的混亂總算結束,我們再度聽到了最初第一主題(熟悉)的聲音,終於可以鬆一口氣了!這就是奏鳴曲式的最後一個階段- 「再現部」。曲子一開始的主題再現,冒險結束,主角的生活終於回歸正常。


再現部的流程,基本上和呈示部一樣,都是「第一主題→連接段落→第二主題→尾奏」的順序。

詳細地來看,再現部第一主題與呈示部時幾乎相同,除了缺少反覆外,完全沒有其他修改;但原本很優美快樂的第二主題,因為在發展部的時候都沒有到莫札特用到,所以第二主題不太開心,就在再現部時變成有點憂鬱的小調了。(?!)

... 很顯然地,第二主題後來變成小調當然不是這個原因(笑),而是因為奏鳴曲式有一個固定的轉調模式,不過在這篇文章不適合扯到複雜的樂理問題,所以我們直接來比對一下第二主題在呈示部和再現部時有什麼不一樣。

呈示部時的第二主題:
再現部時的第二主題:

因為第二主題的調性不同,所以前面的連接段落也連帶稍微做了一些調整;而第二主題之後的尾奏,也因為要用來結束一整個交響曲,莫札特將它加長了一些,讓結尾更具說服力。

以上,這就是一個奏鳴曲式樂章的必經路程,最後我們來不間斷地聽一次整個樂章吧,我會在音樂進行當中,指出每一個我在本文提到的段落,也謝謝您收看這一系列的文章囉!
Photo: 分享 MUZIK ONLINE‧陪你一起聽懂古典音樂之「奏鳴曲式」!
作者- Wiwi 官大為

帶您聽懂「奏鳴曲式」!(三)

然後未知的冒險就要展開了! 
 
在呈示部裡,把兩個主題都完整介紹過之後,下一步就是主角們要開始奇幻的冒險了!在奏鳴曲式裡,我們把這個部分叫做「發展部」,發展部的重點,就是要將你剛剛聽過的主題,除了加入新的素材外,並用各種作曲手法(包括轉調、重疊、改變聲部結構、模進等等)延伸它們。另外一個發展部的特色是調性會非常不穩定,你幾乎很難在發展部當中聽到一個明確的終止式。調性一直不確定,會累積聽眾的緊張感,讓聽眾一直期待緊張感到底什麼時候才能釋放掉。
 
因為這首曲子的整個發展部,幾乎都是建立在第一主題的音型上,所以您一定要先跟這個主題很熟,您才比較容易聽懂接下來莫札特在做什麼。我現在先用鋼琴彈第一主題的第一句給您聽,請播放此音樂檔超過五次(拜託,別偷懶),把這個音型深深印在您的頭腦裡。
 
發展部的一開頭,第一主題的音型再次出現,但後面馬上接到了一些奇怪的音。聽下面的兩個音樂片段,我們來比較呈示部時的第一主題與發展部的開頭有什麼不同。
 
如同剛剛我彈給您聽的,第一主題原本應該長這樣: 
但在發展部時變成這樣,接到了很詭異的音了對不對? 
接下來的音樂,莫札特將第一主題的音型一下子放在高音(長笛)、一下子中音(弦樂)、一下子低音(低音管),也稍微相互重疊,好像在東奔西跑搜尋著什麼,卻又找不著的感覺。
 
然後莫札特決定要緬懷一下巴洛克時期的音樂,所以他將第一主題的音型延伸,寫了一小段很類似巴哈賦格的音樂。
 
再接下來,莫札特繼續堆疊第一主題的音型,這一次排列的時間差更加緊密,和聲上也更加緊張,音樂似乎進入了最慌亂的狀態。
 
之後,散落在高低各聲部的第一主題音型,好像比較合群了起來,開始有了一致的節奏,決定朝向一個特定的方向去。
 
這一連串的混亂終於接近尾聲,莫札特最後用鏗鏘有力的五個和弦,把壓力全部釋放掉......了嗎?
 
什麼?主角們原本覺得已經打敗大魔王、冒險已經結束了,但沒想到大魔王居然還沒死!莫札特在這裡運用的手法稱為「假終止」,簡單地說就是寫作一串和弦序列,讓聽眾覺得一段音樂即將要結束了,但卻在最後一個音用了意想不到的和弦,大家預期的結尾並沒有發生。

帶您聽懂「奏鳴曲式」!(四)

我接下來彈兩個片段,第一個是如果真的要結束的話應該要使用的和弦,第二個則是莫札特在此處使用的假終止。
 
如果真的要結束(真終止)的話,應該要像這樣: 
但莫札特在這裡(假終止)寫成這樣: 
因為剛剛的終止是假的,所以莫札特決定繼續第三次堆疊第一主題的音型,讓主角們繼續奮戰,這一次在段落最後,停在一個聽起來很像「還沒結束」的和弦。
 
總結來說,整個發展部的內容就是利用各種莫札特想到的方式,堆砌第一主題的音型(可憐的第二主題,在發展部裡被冷落了),中間做了一個假結尾之後繼續堆砌第一主題,最後結束在一個未完成的和弦,仿佛在問「結果怎麼樣了呢?」的感覺。我們現在來聽一次完整的發展部,看看您能不能辨識出我剛剛提過的每一個細節。
 
所以......結果到底怎麼樣了呢?
 
終於,一分多鐘的混亂總算結束,我們再度聽到了最初第一主題(熟悉)的聲音,終於可以鬆一口氣了!這就是奏鳴曲式的最後一個階段- 「再現部」。曲子一開始的主題再現,冒險結束,主角的生活終於回歸正常。
 
再現部的流程,基本上和呈示部一樣,都是「第一主題→連接段落→第二主題→尾奏」的順序。
 
詳細地來看,再現部第一主題與呈示部時幾乎相同,除了缺少反覆外,完全沒有其他修改;但原本很優美快樂的第二主題,因為在發展部的時候都沒有到莫札特用到,所以第二主題不太開心,就在再現部時變成有點憂鬱的小調了。(?!)
 
很顯然地,第二主題後來變成小調當然不是這個原因(笑),而是因為奏鳴曲式有一個固定的轉調模式,不過在這篇文章不適合扯到複雜的樂理問題,所以我們直接來比對一下第二主題在呈示部和再現部時有什麼不一樣。
 
呈示部時的第二主題: 
再現部時的第二主題:
 
因為第二主題的調性不同,所以前面的連接段落也連帶稍微做了一些調整;而第二主題之後的尾奏,也因為要用來結束一整個交響曲,莫札特將它加長了一些,讓結尾更具說服力。
 
以上,這就是一個奏鳴曲式樂章的必經路程,最後我們來不間斷地聽一次整個樂章吧,我會在音樂進行當中,指出每一個我在本文提到的段落,也謝謝您收看這一系列的文章囉!

原文:http://www.muzik-online.com/#!column_36_5763
圖片:http://www.classicfm.com/

自《音樂講堂》(30/4/2013)



Mozart- Piano Sonata in G major, K. 283- 1st mov. Allegro