Let's Analyze Another Piece! Part 1 of 2

Analyses of individual works for Classical Guitar and general discussions on analysis. Normal forum copyright rules apply.
Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Let's Analyze Another Piece! Part 1 of 2

Post by stevel » Sat Aug 08, 2015 6:52 pm

Hello Everyone,

This is Part 1 of this analysis, Part 2 can be found here:


Since response to the previous analysis has been positive and already a few request have come in for another analysis, I'm going to go ahead and do another one. Hopefully this will turn into an ongoing series, each analysis building on the previous one moving from easy to advanced.

The first analysis can be found here:


For our second analysis, I'm selecting a piece that is in some ways similar to the Carulli so you can not only practice what you've already learned or reviewed, but that differs enough from the Carulli so you learn a few new elements and build on what you already know, without going crazy!

Again, if you're a more experienced analyst, please let the beginners have a chance to work things out for themselves, and again, remember I'm sticking to a very narrow set of elements so that people can learn in a "controlled environment" at first. As always, there can be many different interpretations, schools of thought, methodologies, etc. as well as downright exceptions to what I say *in other contexts*. But I'm trying to maintain a single context for pedagogical purposes, so please bear with me. We'll learn the "rules" first, and learn to "break the rules" later.

I'll start in the next post.
Last edited by stevel on Sun Aug 09, 2015 4:27 am, edited 3 times in total.

Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece!

Post by stevel » Sat Aug 08, 2015 7:31 pm

The piece I've selected for this analysis is the Adagio movement (Movement I) from a Sonata by Leonhard von Call, from his Opus 22.

This piece can be found in Delcamp D04 on pages 42 and 43.

Again, part of the reason I've selected this and the previous work is that they are both Tonal pieces of the Common Practice Period (CPP hereafter) that belong to a body of work that analysis terms and concepts were really designed around and are most effectively applied to. This eliminates a lot need to worry about "exceptions" to what I'm posting at this time.

However, a poster in the other thread did bring up a good point:

If you are going to try to undertake your own analyses for practice based on what you're hopefully learning here, you should always look at the date of the work or at least the dates of the composer's life. If the piece was written prior to 1650, or after 1850, it will be transitional in nature. That means it may have many elements in common with CPP practice, but it may also deviate subtly to greatly. These analysis methods and concepts may not work on or apply to a Villa-Lobos work, or a John Dowland piece. We'll go into reasons in the future, but for now, I'm sticking with CPP pieces and it might be a good idea for you to do the same until you're more comfortable with other stylistic genres.

The main reason I've selected this piece though is so you can learn something new!

Goal of this analysis:

The primary goal of this analysis is to gain an understanding of two things that happen with chords:

1. Missing notes.

2. Extra notes.


The concept of a "chord" is such a strong aspect of Tonal music and becuase it is a "common practice" it turns out that composers felt that if notes were missing from chords, or added within a chord, we could still understand what the basic chord was. And it's true! In fact, we're so conditioned to hear things this way we've actually come to expect certain chords in certain places. Therefore, composers can *imply* chords with fewer notes than present in a Triad or 7th Chord, and we can *infer* chords with fewer notes than those structures usually contain (both aurally and for analysis). Likewise, they can add notes that they interpret as not being part of the chord, and we interpret them similarly.

So, with that in mind:

Step One - what's the Key?

Look at the Key Signature. No Sharps or Flats, like the Carulli, so it too is either going to be in C Major or A Minor.

We have to look at the MUSIC to determine which of these two it is (or remember, it could even be other Keys if we were looking at an excerpt and the music had modulated).

Let's look at the final measure.

Is it an Am chord or a C chord?

Hold on there Steve, you're trying to trick us aren't you? There's no chord at all. The very last sound is two A notes an octave apart.

You're right.

This is our first example of "a chord with missing notes".

Ok, it may be a bit of stretch to say that these two notes imply an entire chord.

But think about this for a second.

The piece ends on the note(s) A.

It could be in the key of Am or C.

Which "tonic harmony" do you think these A note imply?


Play the piece, then strum a full Am chord after you've played it. Do it again (hey, practice won't hurt) and then try a C chord after it.

Which chord sounds like "home" or has more of a sense of "finality".

Hopefully the Am does.

Now, it's "Tonal" music - that means the goal is the Tonic - it could be Tonic Note or the Tonic Chord. So the A note(s) is perfectly acceptable here as the Tonic Note. In fact, this is very very common in Tonal music. Once the Key has been established, all we need is a single note in certain contexts to tell us what the harmony is (or the function the note has, etc.).

So there's a good deal of evidence here that the piece is probably in Am.

Let's look at the first chord. Remember, it doesn't have to be an Am chord specifically, but if it's not the Tonic chord, it's usually a chord at least in the key (often V).

What is it?

It has A, A, and C.

Steve, you're doing it again aren't you? I was taught a chord needs "3 notes".

Or, you may have been taught a "chord" could have only 2 notes (such as a "power chord") but ti be *sure* of what the chord is, you really need all 3 notes.

What do you think this is? What does it SOUND like?

Does it sound like a C chord - C-E-G, with a missing E and G and an added A, or does it sound like an Am chord - A-C-E, with a missing E?

I hope you hear the latter.

So these TWO notes, A and C (with a duplicate) *represent* an Am chord.

Composers knew we as listeners were familiar enough with the style that omitting one note, in this case the 5th of the chord, wasn't going to make a harmony that was so nebulous we couldn't figure out what they meant.

Think of it as an "abbreviation". An abbreviated chord. I don't need to write "First Inversion" every time - if I write "1st inv" you can probably figure out what I mean, right? Same here.

So with a final note (which we assume to be the Tonic Note) of A, and an initial chord strongly implying an Am harmony, and a Key signature that could be Am, it's a pretty safe bet that this piece is in the Key of Am.

It is.

Here are some observations about TRIADS with omitted notes:

1. The Root is the most important note for naming and implying a Triad, and thus if there's only going to be one tone present to imply a chord, it will be the Root. If only one note is to be omitted from the Triad, and two will remain, more commonly the Root is one of the two that remain.

2. The next most important note for implying a Triad is the 3rd, because it's that note that determines whether the chord is Major or Minor. Thus, 2 note chords most often contain the Root and the 3rd, and omit the 5th. Therefore:

3. If only one note is going to be omitted, the most common omission is the 5th of the chord.

4. Notice in all of these I said "most" or "more" common, and these are "observations". It is possible to have just a Root and 5th, or just a 3rd and 5th to imply a Triad. They are comparatively (comparatively mind you) rare but you will run across them frequently enough that you have to know how to deal with them.

5. A word about doubling: often, when one member of a chord is omitted, there may still be 3 parts or 3 voices. This means one of the parts take one of the other two remaining notes, doubling (duplicating) it. If you look at our opening chord here, you will see it omits the 5th (E) but doubles the A - that's further evidence that A is the more important note - the Root, and in this case, the Tonic. At the end, it's a doubled A again. It's important.

Let's move on. Next post.

Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece!

Post by stevel » Sat Aug 08, 2015 7:47 pm

An additional reason I selected these pieces are becuase there are only 1 or 2 harmonies per measure, which makes them easier to figure out.

Leonhard von Call, Adagio from 2nd Sonata Op. 22

Key: Am

m. 1 - begins with A-A-C, which we determined in the previous post represents an Am chord.

So let's do the Roman Numeral.

m. 1: i

WAIT WAIT WAIT. Steve, what about that D. This measure has a D in it.

A-C-D - that's not a chord.
D-A-C - hey, couldn't that be some type of D7 chord missing the F?
[Jazz Player, emphatically] "That's Am11", or "Amadd11" etc.

1. You're right, it's not a chord.
2. It's a CPP piece, with a Key Sig denoting Am or C, and ends on A notes, and begins with something that could represent a i chord. Do you really think this chord is implying a iv7 of some sort? Play it an see what it SOUNDS like!
3. It ain't jazz. Triads and 7th chords are all that existed in CPP music. Calling them those things is making a square peg fit in a round hole.

The D note is what we call a "Non-Chord Tone" (NCT hereafter).

This is an Am chord.

The D note is simply a MELODIC move, not a HARMONIC one.

Think about the amount of time spent on each of the notes that are a part of the chord in this measure - a high percentage, right? Howe much aural time is devoted to this D? It's only 1/12th the duration of the measure and it's greatly outweighed by the number of A and C notes.

It's not that the D is "unimportant", it's just understood as "not part of the chord" and "melodic" (horizontal in nature) rather than "harmonic" (vertical in nature).

This is a specific type of NCT, called an "Upper Neighbor" (UN) or some people call it "Upper Auxiliary". Do you see how it comes from a chord tone (the C), and goes to the NCT and back to the chord tone?


So we call this "upper neighbor".

When we analyze, we put NCTs in parentheses (so put parentheses around the D note) and usually label above or where there's space, the type of NCT it is, in this case, UN.

So we put our "i" under the first note of m.1, (D)=UN

m.1: i; (D)-UN

Let's go on. Next post.
Last edited by stevel on Sat Aug 08, 2015 7:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece!

Post by stevel » Sat Aug 08, 2015 7:49 pm

m.1: i; (D)-UN
m.2: ?

You figure it out.

Knowing what you know from the previous analysis, you should be able to figure this one out.

Remember, there's something special about the G# note, and it affects the quality of the chord, so make sure you get the proper Roman Numeral.

Next Post.

Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece!

Post by stevel » Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:04 pm

m.1: i; (D)-UN
m.2: ?

What's this?

I'm going to help you on this one.

E-B-D - with another E later in the measure.

Well, Steve, I can't figure out how to stack this "every other letter" to get a chord:


I don't know, it doesn't make sense.

This is a chord with a missing note again.

E- [G] - B - D


It's a 7th chord with a missing note.

It's an E7.

Wait Steve, how do we know whether it would be G or G#? It's G in the Key of Am.

Well, remember, the Dominant harmony is going to be a Major chord in a Minor Key. "V" not "v" (which I hope you already got in the previous post).

So we assume "what it would be if it were there".

Not only that, there's a G# in the previous measure!

So it's E-[G#}-B-D, or E7, or, in this example, V7:

m.1: i; (D)-UN
m.2: V
m.3: V7

What about that E that looks suspiciously like the NCT in m.1?

Well, it's an E chord and it's an E note so we don't worry about it. It's a chord tone. So no NCTs in m.2 or 3.

A few observations about omitted notes in 7th Chords:

1. Like with Triads, the Root is important.

2. The 7th MUST be present or else it's not a 7th chord, just a Triad.

3. If any one note is going to be omitted, it's typically the 5th, though it's also extremely common to omit the 3rd (as our example here).

4. Sometimes, the 3rd AND the 5th may be omitted, leaving only the Root and 7th.

5. Rarely, only the 5th and 7th, 3rd and 7th, or 3rd, 5th and 7th (no root) may be all that's present. Sometimes, these are a different chord, but in some contexts, they could still be implying a 7th chord.

6. Traditionally, the 7th of the 7th chord is not doubled because it is a "tendency tone" - remember, it needs to resolve down. Likewise, and especially in Dominant 7th chords, the 3rd resolves up so it's not doubled. This means usually the Root is doubled when other notes are omitted, or at worst, the 5th. However, remember we're playing guitar and in many cases logistics of the instrument may cause doublings other than those that are "traditional".

Next post.

Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece!

Post by stevel » Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:18 pm

m.1: i; (D)-UN
m.2: ?
m.3: V7
m.4: ?

Measure 4 is on you. Go for it.

m. 5: ?

That one's on you too. Go for it.

One caveat: one note could be interpreted in one of 2 different ways, both of which are equally correct. The difference is primarily in how one labels it. It's good to understand both options, but I'm going to let you guys have at it and we can talk about the two options once everyone has had a chance.

Now, Measure 6.

You all can get the first half of the measure.

But what about the tail end of the measure? All those fast notes?

This is a little tricky for Guitar. It's notated that the D bass note should continue to sound through beat 2 (in 6/8 Meter, there are but 2 beats, not 6, which can be discussed at length in another thread for those who don't understand).

If this were Piano music, the notes on Beat 2 might sustain in the left hand while the right hand plays the other melodic notes.

This means that the ENTIRE chord still sounds while these other notes go.

But on guitar, playing melodic notes like this often means we have to "cut out" chord tones as we work our way down the strings. This means that practically, we have to stop the sounds, but again, in many cases, it could be assumed that they are *implied* as being a "chord" for the remainder of the measure.

In cases like this, we usually do analyze the melodic notes in relation to the chord.

The melodic notes here are:


Now, given the chord you think m. 6 is, which of those notes are chord tones, and which are not?

There are some NCTs here (I'm not telling you which) and they are called "Passing Tones" (PT) because they "pass between" two notes a 3rd apart.

Upper Neighbor (UN) = C/D\C where C was the chord tone and D was the NCT

I think you can figure out what a Lower Neighbor (LN) would be.

Passing Tone (PT) = C/D/E or E/D/C where C and E would BOTH be chord tones, and D would be the NCT (I'm not saying that's the case in m.6).

We could say "ascending" or "descending" PT but most people don't bother outside of very specific discussions.

Note, you can have multiple PTs in a row. For example, in the pattern G-A-B-C over a C Chord, G and C are chord tones, and BOTH A and B are PTs.

Identify the chord for m.6 with Roman Numeral, and identify the NCTs (put parentheses around them) and what type the are.


Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece!

Post by stevel » Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:26 pm

m. 1: i; (D)-UN
m. 2: ?
m. 3: V7
m. 4: ?
m. 5: ?
m. 6: ?; NCTs?

Measure 7 has two harmonies in it, one on Beat 1 and the other on Beat 2 (4th 8th note of the measure).

Beat 1 should be nothing new.

Beat 2 is similar to m. 6. There are Passing Tones. Watch out, the chord is inverted, so put the inversion symbol as well!

Identify the two Roman Numerals and the NCTs.

Measure 8 you should be able to figure out. It's only one harmony for the whole measure. It also has NCTs in the 2nd half of the measure.

This one, BTW is somewhat similar to Measure 5 in that there's a note that could be interpreted as either a NCT or part of the chord. Let's see what happens.

m. 1: i; (D)-UN
m. 2: ?
m. 3: V7
m. 4: ?
m. 5: ?
m. 6: ?; NCTs?
m. 7: ? - ?
m. 8: ?; NCTs?

So you're supposed to be filling in all the "?" spots OK?

Now, measures 9 through 12 should be easy.

So fill those in and I'm going to jump ahead to Measure 13 in the next post.

Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece!

Post by stevel » Sat Aug 08, 2015 9:07 pm

Measure 13.

I want you to put down your guitar, and walk away for an hour or so.

I want you to pick up your guitar and strum some random chords. Play a chord progression in F Major. In G Major. In D Major. In E Minor, in D Minor.

Now, pick up this piece, and start playing right at Measure 13.

Play from Measure 13 to Measure 16 (the double bar).

Does it sound like Am?

Probably not.

Now go back and play it from the beginning, up to the double bar.

It may not seem as "not A minor" when you get to this point, but it still should sound like "hmmm, I'm not so sure we're in Am anymore".

One mistake many Theory students make is they don't play or listen to the music. Granted, in college, some are flute players and don't play a chordal instrument. This puts them at a real disadvantage. Luckily for us, we can play chords, so we do have a better chance at hearing what's going on in multiple part textures like this. Still, it's so helpful to PLAY it.

Now, the "flute player mistake" will be to analyze this section as if they're in Am. So:

m. 13: III
m. 14: iv6
m. 15: V7/III
m. 16: III

Now, this is what "separates the men from the boys" (for lack of a better phrase) in Music Theory. The "boys" simply "name chords". They just give every chord a Roman Numeral and go on their merry way. But that's really no more deeply informative than giving the chords letter names like Am, E7, C, G7, etc.

The "men" are going for a deeper understanding of what's going on musically.

Important Fact about Tonal Music:

Tonal Music uses something we call Functional Harmony. What this means is chords play different roles and have different functions in the key depending on the context.

We've already discussed a couple of aspects:

1. The Final Tonic as a "goal" of the harmonic motion. This is partly achieved by it simply being the final chord, but as we shall see, it often appears at important structural junctures such as the beginning, the beginnings and endings of phrases and sections and so on. For example, in our current analysis, look at the last chord (m.12) before this "new idea" that starts in m. 13. What chord starts the piece? When there is a repeat of the material from the beginning, what chord starts it?

2. The importance of the Dominant Chord with its Leading Tone, and in the case of the Dominant 7th, the inclusion of the dissonant 7th needing resolution, and this concept of "tension" (the Dominant) and "release" (the Tonic). Coupled with the Tonic, the Dominant is one of the two main "pillars" of Tonal Harmony - Dominant and Tonic. If you count the number of chords in this piece so far (m. 1-12) you will find 6 examples each of the Tonic and Dominant. The only other chord appears only ONCE!

Think about that last bit. There are SEVEN chords available in a Key.

How many do we use?

Let's go back and look at the Carulli Prelude. Here are the numbers for each chords:

i: 10
iio: 0
III: 1
iv: 5
V: 7
VI: 0
VII: (1)

In fact, there are THREE chords NOT EVEN IN THE KEY.

But, given this one sampling, which chords do you think are most important for aurally implying the Key? The Tonic and Dominant.

If we tabulate the von Call, and then thousands of other pieces, a picture begins to emerge:

Some chords in the Key and some chord progressions are more important for establishing and maintaining the Tonality (Key Center) than others.

Composers favor the "more important" chords when they clearly want to maintain the key, but they incorporate the other "less important to maintaining the key" chords when they want' to hint at, move towards, or even modulate to another key.

Using C - G7 - C - G7 in the key of Am does little to reinforce the sound of Am, does it?

In fact, we discussed this before in the Carulli with the analysis of the G7 chord not as "bVII" but as "V/III" because it was acting more like a chord from a *different key*.

What about here in the von Call Adagio?

What about these measures 13-16?

Is this Am still? Does analyzing it in Am "make sense"? Even though the numerals can be made to fit (III, iv, and bVII), is that the Tonic and Dominant of Am? Are these the "important" chords for promoting Am as key center?

Hopefully, it doesn't SOUND like it to you.

So we don't want to analyze it that way.

Could this be a change of Tonal Center? A Key Change?

Darn Tootin.

What's our other possible Key based on the Key Signature?

C Major right?

Forget about Am for now.

Pretend we're in C Major. Pretend this is the beginning of a piece, just like when I asked you to play a bunch of random chords and keys and then play this starting at measure 13. It should SOUND like C Major to you.

If it is, what would the chords be?

I - ii6 - V7 - I

C - Dm.F - G7 - C

Does that SOUND like Am?

Does it LOOK like Am? No Am or E7 chords in sight!

But what we have are the Tonic (I) and Dominant (V7) of C Major - C and G7 respectively.

This music is in C Major!

This is called a "Modulation".

We have Modulated from Am to C Major.

Important Fact:

Most CPP pieces modulate at least once. The two most common places to modulate are to the key of the dominant, or to the "relative" key. In Am, this means a modulation to Em or C would be common. In C Major this means modulation to G or Am would be common (others are possible of course, just increasingly less common).

So this piece follows the model - it modulates to the relative Major key (look it up!).

This is called a Direct Modulation, or Phrase Modulation (the latter becuase it typically happens where one phrase ends in one key, and then bam, the next phrase begins in a different key, changing key directly without any transitional chords).

So, our analysis for measures 13-16 should be:

in C: (usually we just write "C:" before the first chord in that key).

m. 13: I
m. 14: ii6
m. 15: V7
m. 16: I

I know there are some extra things (NCTS there) so I'll tackle them in the next post.

Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece!

Post by stevel » Sat Aug 08, 2015 9:50 pm

Let's look more closely at Measures 13-16, which I've told you are in C Major, and represent a Direct Modulation to the Relative Major Key.

In a pattern that's already been well-established in this piece, the first beat of a measure typically tells us the harmony for the measure. The "linear" melodic elements are reserved for the 2nd half of each measure in this piece. Those melodic elements have consisted of NCTs or chord tones, most often moving merely by step up or down in a typical melodic fashion (i.e. less of an arpeggio or repeated note).

Our NCTs thus far have been NT and PT.

In Measure 13, hopefully you can see the first beat is a C Major chord.

Now, unlike the previous measures where at least the bass note continues to sound, here there are rests.

We could take that to mean that these notes are not to be considered part of a harmony. Sometimes that can be the case. When that happens, we simply don't put chord symbols or analyze if they're NCTs or not.

However, here, the notes *can be* seen as part of the harmony, and rather than split hairs about whether they are or not (a question more properly left to Music Philosophers and Music Psychologists) let's go ahead and analyze them within the context of a harmony for practice.

So what we have on beat 2 of m. 13 is what are called "parallel thirds". The interval of a 3rd with both notes moving the same direction to the next interval of a 3rd.

One way this appears is as a Melody that is harmonized at the interval of a 3rd, either above or below. In that context, sometimes it's better NOT to see them as harmonic elements but simply a "harmonization of a melody" that serves to "color" the melody, not necessary "create chords" per se.

Here though, they seem to be "elaborating upon the harmony". They are of course melodic, but unlike the similar measures in the earlier section, here the added note seems less of a "melodic coloring" and more a "continuation of the harmony of the measure".

In that light:

the first dyad, E-G, and the last dyad, C-E are both part of a C harmony. As we discovered at the beginning of our analysis, the C-E could even "stand for" a C Chord. The full C Chord on beat 1, the pattern that's been set up in the piece, the fact that C-E is part of the C harmony, only lends that much more credence to the E-G dyad being considered part of the C harmony. And the fact that they're all in such close proximity only strengthens that analysis.

So all we have to do is put parentheses around the D-F dyad and call them NCTs (PT).

m. 13: I; NCTs (F-D) PT
m. 14: ii6

Measure 14 is no problem because the "melodic element" is really just an arpeggiated part of the Dm chord. No worries.

m. 15: ?

This one is a bit trickier.

Remember how I said in certain contexts, we need less information to infer a harmony? Like, for example, at the end of our piece, we don't really need the full Am chord. We hear this whole piece in mostly Am, we have a V as the 2nd to last chord, and we've just heard a bunch of V7-i repetitions (oops, giving away the end ;-), it's pretty clear that those A notes represent the final Tonic of the piece.

In this case, this is one of those contexts. I haven't gotten too far into yet, but will. This is part of the "functional harmony" but. After a ii6, we kind of expect to hear a V(7) chord. After that, we expect a I. There is a I in m. 16. That makes us really hear m. 15 as a V(7).

Clearly, the first notes spell out a G chord, yes? Also, the last chord of the measure is a G chord, yes?

But this junk in the middle, what's that?

Well, it's parallel thirds again.

Is it a melody harmonized in 3rds which doesn't really need a chordal analysis, or are these still "conveying the idea of the Dominant harmony"?

I think the latter, but again, let's go ahead and analyze them that way for practice.

If you look at the dyad pairs, you have:

G-B; A-C; B-D; C-E; D-F; E-G; F-A; G-B

I want to point out something neat - notice it goes from Leading Tone up the scale to Leading Tone again (B to B) just that the last B is dropped an octave. But can you see how this "line" points to the note C as the ultimate goal?

G-B; B-D and D-F are all part of a G7 chord.

That makes A-C; C-E; E, and A NCTs. They're all PTs.

It doesn't matter that some dyads have both chord tones and some have both NCTS (as m. 13) and some have only on chord tone and one NCT. It also doesn't matter that it "stalls" on the F-A pair for a note. They're still all PTs.

Note, in some of our previous measures I said there was a note that could be interpreted as either a chord tone or a NCT. There is a similar note here but there's a good argument for calling it one over the other. See if you can flesh that out.

So for analysis, we put "V" under the beginning of the measure and just parenthesize and label the NCTs.

You don't need to put the "V" again under the final chord - it's assumed if it's at the beginning of the measure it carries through until a new symbol appears.

Also, if you have a chord like this where the 7th may not appear until later in the measure, you can put "V" at the beginning of the measure and then add the "7" under where the 7th first appears, or you can just put it at the very beginning as "V7" if the 7th doesn't happen too far away (like it might be sketchy to call an entire measure V7 when the 7th only appears as a grace note leading to the next measure at the very last instant).

m. 13: I; NCTs (F-D) PT
m. 14: ii6
m. 15: V; NCTs (lots) PT or, V7; NCTS (fewer) PT
m. 16: I

Now, for m. 16, it "cycles through" positions, but hopefully you can see the "important" positions are on the beat (Beats one and two) so you don't usually have to label this is I - I6/4 - I6 - I.

You can just put "I" in case like this. These are not "functional" inversions (like the V4/2 to i6 was in Carulli) but simply "decorative" ones.

Usually, if people do notate position changes within the *same harmony*, they just put the inversion symbol, with "5" for Root position, so this would look like:

I - 6/4 - 6 - 5

I'm going to stop here for now.

I think I may do the 2nd half in a separate thread which will give us a chance to answer any questions or more fully expand on what was done here.

What you should have learned:

1. How to identify chords with missing/omitted notes.

2. How to discriminate between chord tones and non-chord tones, and how to identify two types of NCTs, the Neighbor Tone (UN and LN) and Passing Tone (PT).

Among other things that will keep coming back :-)

If someone wants to post or link to a PDF of their analysis, that could be instructive. Again, experts, give the beginners a crack first.

Hope you enjoyed this in a thoroughly nerdy way as I do.


User avatar
Steve Kutzer
Posts: 1441
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 4:11 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece!

Post by Steve Kutzer » Sun Aug 09, 2015 12:03 am

Steve - hate to clutter up these threads with a simple thanks, but thanks! This is very well done and very generous of you to do such a stellar job. You should write a book (and I suppose one's posts here are generally accepted to be copyrighted by the author?). I am just starting to learn this stuff, and your posts are by far the most cogent I have come across. Bravo!
See my technology (and guitar!) site CIO Dojo

Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece! Part 1 of 2

Post by stevel » Sun Aug 09, 2015 2:37 am

Thanks so much Steve K - I hop you're getting something out of it.

Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 11:01 pm
Location: Long Island,New York

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece! Part 1 of 2

Post by jake39 » Sun Aug 09, 2015 3:36 am

This is honestly more cohesive and thorough than an awful lot of published books I've seen. Once again great job and thanks Steve!


Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2013 1:53 pm
Location: Manchester, UK

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece! Part 1 of 2

Post by tom2977 » Sun Aug 09, 2015 4:38 pm

Feel the same.....i am trying to resist cluttering this up but want to express my thanks and to encourage you to carry on. i really appreciate your efforts. I am finding this very structured and useful. Looking forward to building on this. I have done today's homework and am fairly confident i'm on the right track. It might be useful to create pdf's of each lesson and have them as downloadable theory lessons on Delcamp? Teaching module style.

Agree that this could be built into a very useful book.

Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 5:33 pm
Location: Forest Hills, NY

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece! Part 1 of 2

Post by markworthi » Tue Aug 18, 2015 8:38 pm


I too am finding this very useful and would like to say thanks a lot!

I admit, however, that some of the question marks (on and after the 5th measure or so) are remaining question marks to me. I hope I'm not spoiling the flow of the thread (or ruining anyone else's chance at answering), but I will posit my guess for measure 5. Maybe others will correct me if I am wrong, and that can be instructive!

For measure 5, the second harmony is the real question. The E and the G, to me, seem as if they could be part of a C Major triad, but the missing root seems unlikely. Nevertheless, the C has just been played, so maybe this is not a problem.

I have a ruled out the V chord, since that would require G#. Finally, I am thinking it could be Am7. Even though the root and the third would be missing, the A and the C were already played in the opening chord. And the G is usually not sharp in the case of the tonic chord. Also, in the next measure the G resolves down to an F, as we would expect. So my guess is Am7 or i7.

Thoughts anyone?

Posts: 578
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: Let's Analyze Another Piece! Part 1 of 2

Post by stevel » Wed Aug 26, 2015 1:24 am

markworthi wrote:I have a ruled out the V chord, since that would require G#.
Very good.

Finally, I am thinking it could be Am7.
Also very good. Gold star :-)

Even though the root and the third would be missing, the A and the C were already played in the opening chord. And the G is usually not sharp in the case of the tonic chord. Also, in the next measure the G resolves down to an F, as we would expect. So my guess is Am7 or i7.
Be careful here Mark,

The A bass note is a dotted quarter note, so it's actually sounding for the entire 2nd beat (2 la le or "4 5 6" of the measure).

So at the last 8th note of the measure, the E and G should be sounding, but the A bass note should still be sounding.

And you're right we just heard the C.

So it's A [ ] E G with the implication of A [C] E G


And yes, the numeral for that is "i7".

This would be an OK analysis, because as you noticed (also gold star!) the G does resolve down to the F in the next chord. So that's pretty good evidence it could be interpreted as a functional 7th.

Usually for the analysis, we'd just write "i" under the first beat, and then you can just put a "7" under the last 8th note. (you will also see "i7", "(i7)" or "(7)" as well).

Another interpretation is that it's simply a passing tone.

Good job!


Return to “Analysis of Classical Guitar Works”