Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretation

Analyses of individual works for Classical Guitar and general discussions on analysis. Normal forum copyright rules apply.
Ramon Amira
Teacher
Posts: 2965
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:44 am
Location: New York City

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Ramon Amira » Mon Jun 09, 2014 9:31 pm

AlaricTheFirst wrote:Very nice! Thank you for the analyzis, Ramon. What I really want to see is the "part B" interpretation. As said before, I've probably mastered the piece technically but I still need to add more expression to it.
Thank you. I am just starting on Part Two, and will post it when I'm finished.
Classical and Flamenco guitar lessons via Skype worldwide - Classical and Flamenco guitars from Spain

User avatar
Yisrael van Handel
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:26 pm
Location: Modi'in Illit, Israel

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Yisrael van Handel » Thu Jun 19, 2014 12:59 pm

Ramon Amira wrote:Thank you. I am just starting on Part Two, and will post it when I'm finished.
Ramon, I am also anxiously waiting for Part Two. I started playing Lagrima just so I could follow the discussion. I would like to encourage you to feel free to go a little beyond structural analysis and also say something about appropriate tone quality and articulation.
Yisrael van Handel
Modi'in Ilit, Israel

Ramon Amira
Teacher
Posts: 2965
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:44 am
Location: New York City

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Ramon Amira » Mon Aug 04, 2014 11:24 pm

Here, in a post below, is the second half of my structural analysis and notes for interpretation for "Lagrima." I have attached it below a copy of the original post for those who did not see the original, as well as for those who did, to maintain a sense of continuity, and to present the analysis as an integral whole.
Classical and Flamenco guitar lessons via Skype worldwide - Classical and Flamenco guitars from Spain

Ramon Amira
Teacher
Posts: 2965
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:44 am
Location: New York City

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Ramon Amira » Mon Aug 04, 2014 11:25 pm

This is the first of a series of articles I will be posting, on an aspect of classical guitar pedagogy that I feel has not been sufficiently explored. Much of pedagogy deals with technique, but not enough with interpretation. Of course a good teacher will help his or her student with interpretation, but many players do not have teachers for any one of a number of reasons. And some teachers are reluctant to delve into interpretation with their students, feeling that interpretation is too personal. Others might be focused too intently on technique.

While interpretation is frequently a matter of "play it the way you feel it," there is one important facet of the music that can be used as a guide to interpretation - structure. The structure of a piece can often be used as something of a blueprint for interpretation. I am speaking of going beyond the obvious - e.g., a lyrical passage more quietly, etc. I mean a minute linear breakdown and analysis of the structure.

The following structural analysis of "Lagrima" has ensued from a lesson I recently gave to a Delcamp member. He had no trouble actually playing the notes, so I thought the lesson would be better used for interpretation. What emerged was a focus on a combination of phrasing and dynamics derived from the structure, as opposed to "playing it the way you feel it."

The first thing to do is identify and separate the disparate parts of the music. Lagrima has more parts than just melody and harmony. There are parts that can best be identified as "fills," which strictly speaking are neither harmony nor accompaniment. These should be isolated with the use of dynamics and tempo manipulation.

Dynamics can and should be used in the melody as well, but I am not speaking of fairly obvious wholesale dynamics, but rather incremental dynamics from note to note, as opposed to dynamics applied uniformly to an entire line or lines, sections, etc.

Measures One and Two:

In Measure One the melody line is ascending: G# -A - B. This ascension can be enhanced by ascending in volume as well as pitch, playing each successive note somewhat louder than the preceding note, as opposed to a linear uniformity. By doing that, not only is the ascension enhanced, but so is the peak of the melody line at B. The bass voice E - F# - G# - D# is executed the same way. The accompanying Bs are played softer to separate melody from accompaniment.

The F# on the first beat of Measure Two marks the end of the melody line. But this is a sharp descent from the B, lower even that the very first treble note of Measure One. Consequently, if it is played at or near the volume of the B, it threatens to dissipate the effect of the peak at B. Conversely, a drop in volume at the F# will enhance the peak at the B.

The remainder of Measure Two is a fill. It should be isolated by executing a short fermata after the F# and then playing the fill softly, thus establishing a clear distinction between melody and fill, a distinction that is not clearly delineated when the fill immediately follows the melody in a continuous line and at the same volume.

Measures Three and Four are a repeat of Measures One and Two, and should be played the same way.

Measures Five and Six are the exact opposite of Measures One and Two, as the melody line is now descending. This is a straight and continuous descent to the end of the melody line: E - D# - C# - B. The same principle can be used as was in Measures One and Two. Each successive note is played at a somewhat lower volume than the preceding note, thus creating a deeper emotional feeling of descent. The bottom B was first the peak of the melody line, and is now the nadir.

The balance of Measure Six is a fill, and as the fill in Measure Two should be isolated by executing a short fermata after the B and then playing the fill softly.

Measures Seven and Eight:

The melody line again consists of just four notes descending - G# - C# - B - E. It might seem on the surface that the melody line consists of seven notes, starting with the G# on the first beat of Measure Seven, and reading: G# - E - C# - F# - B - D# - E. But that construction would be inconsistent with everything that precedes it - four melody notes followed by fill - four melody notes followed by fill - four melody notes followed by fill. To be consistent structurally then, one would expect Measures Seven and Eight to consist of once again four melody notes, leading to the tonic, which is in fact the case if one construes the melody line as G# - C# - B - E.

Further evidence that the melody line is four notes and not seven can be discerned by the construction of the other voices. The lower voice is comprised of four notes: B - A# - A - G#. And the third voice - also comprised of four notes - is in the treble: E - F# - D# - E. Play each of these two voices independently and it becomes clear that they are both discrete parts. So Measures Seven/Eight really consists of three four-note voices - one melody line, and two harmony voices.

A useful exercise to illuminate the structure as described above is to extract the melody line and play it in isolation: G# -A - B - F# . . . . G# -A - B - F# . . . . E - D# - C# - B . . . . G# - C# - B - E.


PART TWO - LAGRIMA

The melody line starts with Beat One of Measure One (treating this part as a separate entity)and ends on the first beat of Measure Two. It falls within a fairly narrow range and so should also be executed within a narrow dynamic range.

The run in thirds starting in the second measure and ending on Beat One of the Third Measure is a fill, and as with the other fills, should be played softer than the melody line.

The descending melody line beginning in Measure Three and ending on the first beat of Measure Four: E - C - A - F#, indirectly echoes the descending melody line in Measures Five and Six of Part One, and should be played the same way. Each successive note is played at a somewhat lower volume than the preceding note, thus creating a deeper emotional feeling of descent. This passage also functions as a prelude to the coming climax - the calm before the storm, as it were.

The following B - C - B - B is a fill. Now - beginning with the F# on the second half of the third beat in Measure Four and ending on the D on the first beat of Measure Six, we have a melody line not only ascending to a peak per se, but to THE peak of the piece.

The same principle can be applied here as was used in Measure One of Part One. The ascension can be enhanced by ascending in volume as well as pitch, playing each successive note somewhat louder than the preceding note, as opposed to a linear uniformity. By doing that, not only is the ascension enhanced, but so is the peak of the melody line at D.

However, In Part One that ascending melody line was at the very beginning. Here we have one coming at the end, the very climax of the piece, and this calls for additional treatment. The D on top has to be approached "stealthily" if it is to have its maximum effect. The way to do it is with incremental ritard. That is, starting with the G on the first beat of Measure Five, you execute a very slight ritard before playing the A. Then an ever so slightly longer ritard before playing the B. And then a still longer ritard before finally letting the D create a dramatic climax.

This whole sequence must be handled extremely carefully, and first experimented with for timing. If the ritards come too close upon each other you lose the sense of "stretching." If you drag them out too far you lose the sense of climax. In particular the last ritard is the key. A well timed ritard there creates tension - an agony of anticipation of the peak note and climax. Here again, if you play the D too soon you don't allow the anticipation to build. If you wait a fraction too long, the moment is lost. The D should be played with vibrato and a fermata.

The balance of Measure Six is a fill winding down the climax at D, as is Measures Seven and Eight, all of which should be played gradually softer and with a slight ritard.

Ramon
Classical and Flamenco guitar lessons via Skype worldwide - Classical and Flamenco guitars from Spain

MrSniff

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by MrSniff » Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:20 am

Thank you for taking the time to do this; I started working on this with my teacher at the end of term, and as a long-time beginner (3 years - keen but no discernible talent) this gives great insight into the piece.

ChristianK
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 5:45 pm
Location: Vienna, VA

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by ChristianK » Tue Aug 05, 2014 4:24 pm

Ramon Amira wrote:This whole sequence must be handled extremely carefully, and first experimented with for timing. If the ritards come too close upon each other you lose the sense of "stretching." If you drag them out too far you lose the sense of climax. In particular the last ritard is the key. A well timed ritard there creates tension - an agony of anticipation of the peak note and climax. Here again, if you play the D too soon you don't allow the anticipation to build. If you wait a fraction too long, the moment is lost. The D should be played with vibrato and a fermata.
Thank you Ramon. I've always had difficulty here. I worked on the timing with your suggestion and difference is amazing.

Ramon Amira
Teacher
Posts: 2965
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:44 am
Location: New York City

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Ramon Amira » Wed Aug 06, 2014 9:26 pm

I should add that the incremental ritards at the end are just a suggestion. But I feel that no matter what you should increase the volume incrementally , and at least do a substantial ritard before the climax at D. Same idea obtains for the ritard in that case - it must be exactly the right duration.

Ramon
Classical and Flamenco guitar lessons via Skype worldwide - Classical and Flamenco guitars from Spain

Bman

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Bman » Sun Aug 10, 2014 12:33 am

Thank you, these have helped a lot.

What's your opinion on using a pull-off for the climactic run that starts the 6th measure? Most sheet music shows a pull-off but I've seen some very good guitarists not use one choosing to use individual plucks for each note. When I play it, it sounds better when I forego the pull-off.

Ramon Amira
Teacher
Posts: 2965
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:44 am
Location: New York City

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Ramon Amira » Sun Aug 10, 2014 4:16 pm

Bman wrote:Thank you, these have helped a lot.

What's your opinion on using a pull-off for the climactic run that starts the 6th measure? Most sheet music shows a pull-off but I've seen some very good guitarists not use one choosing to use individual plucks for each note. When I play it, it sounds better when I forego the pull-off.
I personally do not use or recommend a slur there. As I mentioned, I feel the D calls for vibrato and a fermata. After both, a slur would be fairly weak, but more importantly the C is the beginning of a descending run that constitutes a winding down of the climax at D. A slur there would have the effect of "attaching" the C to the D, and weakening the beginning of the run.

Ramon
Classical and Flamenco guitar lessons via Skype worldwide - Classical and Flamenco guitars from Spain

granadina
Posts: 482
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 3:22 pm

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by granadina » Sun Aug 10, 2014 6:12 pm

A question about the title .
Lagrima translated is - TEAR ; A TEAR DROP
The suffused Melancholy of the word .. does that in any way provide a backdrop
for the interpretation ?

Ramon Amira
Teacher
Posts: 2965
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:44 am
Location: New York City

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Ramon Amira » Sat Aug 16, 2014 4:02 am

granadina wrote:A question about the title .
Lagrima translated is - TEAR ; A TEAR DROP
The suffused Melancholy of the word .. does that in any way provide a backdrop
for the interpretation ?
Well sure, a title like that, and others - "Nocturne,Waltz," suggest the basic nature of a piece, and can be a general guide to such things as tempo, dynamics, etc.

\Ramon
Classical and Flamenco guitar lessons via Skype worldwide - Classical and Flamenco guitars from Spain

Ramon Amira
Teacher
Posts: 2965
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:44 am
Location: New York City

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Ramon Amira » Sun Aug 17, 2014 3:14 pm

I was just told by a member who had been waiting for Part Two of my analysis that he had not realized that I have now incorporated Part Two with my original Part One instead of posting it as a separate post.

I have combined Part One and Part Two in a new post above, still contained within this original thread.

Ramon
Classical and Flamenco guitar lessons via Skype worldwide - Classical and Flamenco guitars from Spain

User avatar
Non Tabius
Posts: 923
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2010 1:00 am
Location: Philipstown South Africa

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Non Tabius » Sun Aug 17, 2014 3:57 pm

Thanks for your devotion Ramon.Your notes also serve as an as aid in creating Program Notes for examination purposes e.g Royals where discussion on form and structure are a seperate aspect for all instruments.

Ramon Amira
Teacher
Posts: 2965
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:44 am
Location: New York City

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Ramon Amira » Fri Aug 22, 2014 3:26 pm

kelidj wrote:It´s really helpful for those of us who are practicing classical guitar without a teacher to get an analyzis like this. I recently started to learn Lagrima. I think I have mastered the piece technically but I´m still thinking about how to interpret it. I hope you will find the time to write about the B part of the pice. I will read it for sure.
In case you missed it, I have now posted the second half of my analysis of "Lagrima." I started posting it as a separate post, but then I realized it would make the entire analysis disjointed, so I put a new post (above) incorporating both parts into one post so it could be studied as an integral whole. Scroll up a bit and you'll find the complete work in one piece.

Ramon
Classical and Flamenco guitar lessons via Skype worldwide - Classical and Flamenco guitars from Spain

User avatar
Arthur Becker
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:56 pm
Location: Texas, USA

Re: Lagrima: A structural analysis and notes for interpretat

Post by Arthur Becker » Fri Aug 22, 2014 7:02 pm

Ramon Amira wrote: The F# on the first beat of Measure Two marks the end of the melody line. But this is a sharp descent from the B, lower even that the very first treble note of Measure One. Consequently, if it is played at or near the volume of the B, it threatens to dissipate the effect of the peak at B. Conversely, a drop in volume at the F# will enhance the peak at the B.
It is worth considering continuing crescendo through to the F#. Decreasing the volume to me says the thought is done and we shall move on. But the thought is not done. It is thought over again in the next few measures then added to with the final melodic descent. I feel a strong rest on F# helps tie the entire phrase together and keep me as a listener leaning forward to see what happens next. I also prefer to start light and increase through to the B in measures 5-6, backing off significantly on the G#. These are just my personal preferences.

Return to “Analysis of Classical Guitar Works”