THE ROLE OF THE AFFECT AND THE KEY CHARACTERISTICS IN CHOPIN’S PIANO MUSIC

A thesis submitted to the College of the Arts of Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts

by

Yeeun Hwang

May, 2021 ii

Thesis written by

Yeeun Hwang

B.A., Sangmyung University, 2018

M.A., Kent State University, 2021

Approved by

______Joshua Albrecht, Ph.D., Advisor

______Kent McWilliams, D.M.A., Director, School of Music

______John Crawford-Spinelli, Dean, College of the Arts

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙v

LIST OF TABLES ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙v

MUSICAL EXAMPLES ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙vi

ACKNOLWEDGEMENTS ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙viii

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙1

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙6 The Life of Frédéric Chopin ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙6 The Cultural Environment and Bourgeois in the Nineteenth Century ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙10 The Transformation of the Pitch Level and Temperament System until Chopin’s time ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙22 The Transformation of the Pitch Level ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙22 The Transformation of the Temperament System ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙25

III. ANALYSIS OF KEY CHARACTERISTICS IN CHOPIN’S PIANO MUSIC ∙∙∙∙∙∙30 The Key of A-flat Major ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙30 The Character of ‘Tender’ or ‘Intimate’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙32 The Character of ‘Grave’ or ‘Gloomy’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙39 The Character of ‘Majestic’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙42 The Key of C Major ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙47 The Character of ‘Militant’ or ‘Vigorous’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙49 The Character of ‘Pure’ or ‘Simplicity’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙52 The Character of ‘Rejoice’ or ‘Splendid (or Grandioso)’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙55 The Key of C Minor and F Minor ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙57 C Minor ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙60 The Character of ‘Pathetic’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙60 The Character of ‘Grave’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙63 The Character of ‘Gloomy’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙64 F Minor ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙ 66 The Character of ‘Gloomy’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙66 The Character of ‘Sorrow’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙72 iv

The Character of ‘Misery’ ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙74

IV. COMPUTATIONAL ANALYSIS OF CHOPIN’S PIANO MUSIC ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙75 Introduction ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙75 Sampling Methodology ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙80 Computational Methodology ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙83 Results ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙87 Mode ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙89 Accidental Category ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙ 95 Mode X Accidental Category ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙98 Key Categorization ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙102

V. CONCLUSION ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙107

APPENDICES APPENDIX A. THE KEY CLASSIFICATION OF CHOPIN’S WORKS ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙113 APPENDIX B. GRAPH OF MODES ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙121 APPENDIX C. THE TONALITY PROPORTION IN CHOPIN’S PIANO MUSIC ∙∙∙122

REFERENCES ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙123

v

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Proportion of Melodic Intervals that are Semitones ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙90

Figure 2. Distribution of Time Signature Denominator by Mode ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙91

Figure 3. Importance of Bass Register by Mode ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙92

Figure 4. Pitch-Class Variability after Folding by Accidental Category ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙97

Figure 5. Pitch-Class Variability after Folding by Mode X Accidental Category ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙100

Figure 6. Pitch-Class Skewness after Folding by Mode X Accidental Category ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙101

Figure 7. Pitch-Class Kurtosis after Folding by Specific Key ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙104

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. The Change of Key of A-flat Major Impression ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙31

Table 2. The Change of Key of C Major Impression ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙47

Table 3. The Change of Key of C Minor Impression ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙58

Table 4. The Change of Key of F Minor Impression ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙59

Table 5. A Confusion Matrix Based on the Machine-Learning Algorithm’s Ability to Sort Accidental Category Using Low-Level Musical Features ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙98

Table 6. A Confusion Matrix Based on the Machine-Learning Algorithm’s Ability to Sort Mode X Accidental Category Using Low-Level Musical Features ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙102

Table 7. A Confusion Matrix Based on the Machine-Learning Algorithm’s Ability to Sort Key Category Using Low-Level Musical Features ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙106

vi

LIST OF MUSICAL EXAMPLES

Example 1. Impromptu Op.29 (c1837) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙33

Example 2. Waltzes Op.34 No.1 ‘Valse Brillante’ (1835) mm.17-24 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙34

Example 3. Nocturnes Op.32 No.2 (1837) mm.3-6 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙34

Example 4. Mazurkas Op.59 No.2 (1845) mm.1-9 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙35

Example 5. Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.17 (1836) mm.1-6 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙35

Example 6. Mazurkas Op.7 No.4 (1830-2) mm. 1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙36

Example 7. Ballade Op.47 (1841) mm. 1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙37

Example 8. Ballade Op.47 (1841) mm. 52-58 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙37

Example 9. Etudes Op.10 No.10 mm. 1-2 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙38

Example 10. Tarantelle Op.43 (1841) mm.1-7 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙38

Example 11. Sonata Op.4 movement III (1827-8) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙39

Example 12. Waltzes Op.69 No.1 (1835) mm.1-8 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙40

Example 13. Mazurkas Op.17 No.3 (1833) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙42

Example 14. Waltzes Op.34 No.1 ‘Valse Brillante’ (1835) mm.17-24 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙43

Example 15. Waltzes Op.34 No.1 ‘Valse Brillante’ (1835) mm.74-78 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙44

Example 16. Polonaise Op.53 (1842) mm.17-20 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙44

Example 17. Polonaise-Fantasie Op.61 (1846) mm.22-27 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙46

Example 18. Mazurkas Op.56 No.2 (1843) mm.1-6 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙50

Example 19. Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.1 (1838-9) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙51

Example 20. Mazurkas Op.68 No.1 (1829) mm.3-6 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙52

Example 21. Mazurkas Op.67 No.3 (1835) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙53

vii

Example 22. Mazurkas Op.24 No.2 (1833) mm.1-6 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙53

Example 23. Mazurkas Op.33 No.3 (1837-8) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙54

Example 24. Mazurkas Op.7 No.5 (1830-32) mm.3-6 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙54

Example 25. Etudes Op.10 No.1 (1830) mm.1-3 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙56

Example 26. Etudes Op.10 No.7 (1832) mm.1-3 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙56

Example 27. Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.20 (1838-9) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙61

Example 28. Etudes Op.25 No.12 (1836) mm.1-3 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙62

Example 29. Polonaises Op.40 No.2 (1839) mm.3-6 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙62

Example 30. Nocturnes Op.48 No.1 (1841) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙63

Example 31. Funeral March Op.72 No.2 (1841) mm.1-6 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙64

Example 32. Mazurkas Op.56 No.3 (1841) mm.1-5 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙65

Example 33. Mazurkas Op.30 No.1 (1837) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙65

Example 34. Mazurkas Op.7 No.3 (1830-31) mm.1-8 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙68

Example 35. Etudes Op.10 No.9 (1829) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙68

Example 36. Ballade Op.52 (1842-3) mm. 8-12 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙69

Example 37. Etudes Op.25 No.2 (1836) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙70

Example 38. Mazurkas Op.63 No.2 (1846) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙70

Example 39. Fantasie Op.49 (1841) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙71

Example 40. Nocturnes Op.55 No.1 (1842-4) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙72

Example 41. Mazurkas Op.68 No.4 (?1846) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙73

Example 42. Nocturnes Op.70 No.2 (1842) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙73

Example 43. Polonaises Op.71 No.3 (1828) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙73

Example 44. Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.18 (1838-9) mm.1-4 ∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙74

viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am very grateful for the guidance and helps to me during this research. I want to thank my advisor, professor Joshua Albrecht, who guided me throughout my work on this thesis.

Without his comments and suggestions, I would not be able to start and finish this thesis. I would also like to thank two readers of my thesis, professor Richard Devore and professor Hana Chu.

Their feedback played an indispensable role in the development and refinement of this study.

Also, thanks to Dr. Ju-hwan Yu for his inspiring comments on my research. I thank my friends for their help and encouragement. Finally, I deeply appreciate my mother and father. Without their support, I could not have done this thesis.

1

CHAPTER I.

INTRODUCTION

The key character concept means the individual mood and measuring in tonal music and is often expressed verbally. As Rita Steblin mentioned in her research A History of Key

Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries (1983), the key affect has caused many controversies for a long time. Some scholars who have made significant achievements were opposed to the key affect. Nevertheless, Steblin notes that there are considerable numbers of literature as “well-established musical facts” about the key characteristics and that key affects are an issue that can never be overlooked.1

The earliest documents on key characteristics collected by Steblin begins in the late

1600s. To determine whether the concept of key characteristics written at the end of the seventeenth century was still a ‘common sense’ for musicians of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; first, it is necessary to determine whether the pitch level of the seventeenth century still had the same level to be set in the Classic to Romantic Period. Only then can we know if C major’s impression in the late seventeenth century is comparable to that of the next generation.

Unfortunately, the late seventeenth century was still a mixture of meantone temperament and well temperament, with no pitch standard; regional and performance venues differences

1 Rita Steblin, A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries, 2nd ed. (Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 2002), 1. 2

were sometimes extreme enough to distinguish such as ‘Cammerton’2 and ‘Chorton.’3

However, many studies about the pitch level, used from the mid-seventeenth to the 1830s in

Europe, have become significant.

Meanwhile, the descriptions of affect characteristics of particular keys since the mid-

1700s generally confirm that similar patterns of verbal adjectives, adverbs, and nouns were being used repeatedly. The following hypothesis may exist for the reason why such a wide range of

‘preconceptions’ exist on particular keys: 1) possibility of the common notion of the key existed in the form of ‘collective unconscious’ based on delicate experiences between intellectuals and artists, 2) culture’s learning formed in the continuous citation of any “overwhelming individuals.” Regardless of the weight of the possibility, the publications discussing how keys express affects were becoming more popular since the eighteenth century.

In the early nineteenth century in Europe, pitch A was tuned to approximately standard pitch level.4 The public concerts were booming, and the middle-class willingly opened their wallets for admission tickets and began to buy music sheets and instruments produced on a large scale by the Industrial Revolution. The development of railways and transportations had fueled the international music markets. In particular, musicians who were performer-composers stood out during this period, and Chopin was one of the important musicians.

Steblin’s reference reveals the results from tracking individual characteristics on each key through documents. However, the study does not prove how this reference emerges in the

2 The term of the ordinary Cammerton means “the secular instrumental pitch level associated with the woodwinds and other instruments in the early eighteenth century.” Bruce Haynes, A History of Performing Pitch: The Story of “A” (Lanham: The Scarecrow Press, Inc., 2002), xxxi.

3 The term Chorton means “the pitch level associated with of organs and brass instruments in the early eighteenth century,” and according to the author, “would be a whole-tone or more above than Cammerton.” Ibid., xxxv.

4 Ibid., 343. 3

actual works.

In order to find out how Steblin's research on key characteristics applies to real works, one must first determine whether the key chosen by the composer is used freely by one's unconscious judgment; to determine whether the unconscious notions belong to the traditional concepts from the previous generations: 1) the collective concepts about the keys at the period of the composers were active, 2) the instrument of the work must not be influenced by the specific tonalities, 3) the composer is fully committed to the specific genre and leaves a considerable amount of musical work. In that way, the population’s size will sufficient; a ‘piano piece’ composed by a ‘virtuoso pianist’ will be appropriate for these studies because it is more reasonable to assume that a pianist-composer with overwhelming performance skills who has little technical constraints on piano.

Chopin was a pianist-composer, and his virtuosity makes the most meaningful his key.

Moreover, he had a more powerful population in piano music than any of his contemporary composers. The population is a more intuitive model to mine the relationship between individual tendencies and collective notions about the key characteristics is why this study focused on

Chopin’s work as the main issue.

Several basic designs are needed for this study to know whether key characteristics passed through documents were reflected in nineteenth-century composer Chopin’s works. The introduction of this study is divided into three chapters.

First, a brief reference to Chopin's life is necessary at the beginning. This study explains what environment he grew up in, what he had been influenced by, and his musical life journey through Chopin's short life.

Second, it is necessary to mention the Bourgeois-class, which greatly influenced the 4

cultural environment and the music market in the 1800s of Europe. To understand that Chopin’s salon music manner, it is necessary to understand the landscape of the cultural power moving to the new middle-class. In particular, this study will describe the various media in the cultural market at that time, which characters were participating in active art criticism through newspapers and magazines about what their opinions contributed to form a sense of cultural awareness. To this end, several opinions on key characteristics and changes will be described through specific examples, especially the perception of the key held by E. T. A. Hoffmann

(1776-1822), a master of nineteenth-century Romantic literature.

The third chapter is one of the answers to the personal questions during this study.

Indeed, key characteristics in music required objective evidence of at least the early nineteenth century as to whether all musicians agreed commonly at the time and whether their key impressions were all based on similar data. This is because the collective perception of key characteristics is only established if the musicians sympathize with the same pitch level.

Therefore, this chapter describes whether the social perception of pitch level in the nineteenth century was stable and when the stability began. On the other hand, understanding the early nineteenth century’s temperament system is as important as social consensus on the pitch level.

This is because a stable agreement of the system is needed first to stabilize the pitch level. It describes the changes in temperament systems and the arrival point of the change until the early nineteenth century in Chopin’s time.

This study’s body contains an analysis of the twenty-four keys in Steblin’s reference, focusing on the keys’ overwhelming appearance in Chopin’s works. From the most significant keys in 181 pieces, musical works in A-flat and C major in each chapter; the C minor and F minor are combined into a single chapter. The principles for investigating key characteristics 5

from 181 works are as follows: 1) the piano solo works officially listed with opus numbers are included, 2) the posthumous works officially listed with opus numbers are included, 3) the works of multi-movement, such as a Sonata of four movements, are classified into four independent works. For example, Twenty-four Preludes, Op.28 deals with twenty-four individual works.

The last chapter of this study contains the analysis using the jSymbolic, an automatic determining system for analyzing the range of pitches, the various registers, the diversity of chord types, the relatively of tonal centers, the mean and median pitch heights, the levels of chromaticism, the prevalence of each type of vertical intervals, textural densities, rhythmic activities, average chord durations, and note densities per quarter note, Etc. in music. The computational analysis is, at first glance, unfamiliar to traditional methods of analysis. However, using numbers, statistics, and sampling by menus to analyze musical works that are always believed to be emotion-based reveals a numerical analysis of Chopin’s emotional tendency. For this analysis, Dr. Joshua Albrecht’s advice was very great.

6

CHAPTER II.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The Life of Frédéric Chopin

Frédéric François, Chopin (1810-1849) was a Polish composer and pianist from the

Romantic Period. Most of Chopin's compositions consist of works for solo piano, which exceeds two hundred pieces. According to Methuen-Campbell, a music scholar (1992), Chopin's music was recognized into the standard repertoire of piano exceptionally by the end of the nineteenth century. He was also widely regarded as par excellence the piano composer in Europe.5

Chopin was born in the Zelazowa-Wola, a village in the Mazowsze region of Poland. He was born as the eldest son of Nicolas Chopin (in Polish: Mikołaj Chopin; 1771-1844),

Frenchman, and his Polish wife, Justyna Krzyzanowska. His family moved to Warsaw shortly after Chopin was born. Chopin started piano lessons at age six with Wojciech Zywny (1756-

1842) and started composition lessons the year after. He gave his first public performance as a pianist at age eight, and his composition was published in the same year. His unusual talent garnered much attention from the crowds and led to salon and concert performances. These events played an important role in his smooth transition and adaptation to the French aristocratic society.6

5 James Methuen-Campbell, “Chopin in Performance,” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, edited by Jim Samson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 191.

6 James Huneker, Chopin the Man and His Music: From a 1900 edition (Auckland: The Floating Press, 2008), 7-12. 7

With Jozef Elsner (1769-1854), a composer and music teacher, Chopin started serious composition lessons at age twelve. At age sixteen, he enrolled in classes at the Warsaw

Conservatory. The following year, age seventeen, he composed Là ci darem la mano and the

Sonata Op.4; at age eighteen, Chopin composed Rondo à la Krakowiak. These pieces still get performed regularly at public concerts. After he graduated from the Warsaw Conservatory, he immediately moved to Vienna and received great acclamation.7

After his success in Vienna, he returned to Warsaw in 1825, but Poland’s political situation was changing rapidly after Alexander I of Russia. Alexander’s younger brother

Nicholas I, the successor of Tsar, was a tyrannical ruler and eventually led to people’s recognition of Poland as the “police nation.” There were government spies placed sporadically around the country to pressure the citizens, and complaints abounded.8

The Warsaw performances significantly contributed to Chopin’s popularity. Chopin’s continued interest in playing for a bigger audience and passion for reaching the other side of the world led him to leave Warsaw in the early winter of 1830. Ever since that departure, Chopin was not able to come back to his motherland. Chopin was full of pride and optimism upon his departure because of Vienna’s fond memories from his past. Unfortunately, within a week after his arrival, a revolution ignited, and the Russians defeated Warsaw patently. At the time, the

Austrian Empire was in alliance with Russian Empire, which had exercised force against

Warsaw. Being an enemy of Russia, Poland was only a diplomatic “avoidance state” in Vienna’s political perspective.9 Naturally, the Polish Chopin became to be regarded as a person to avoid.

7 J. Cuthbert Hadden, Chopin (Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press Ltd., 2002), 10-12.

8 Matthew Rendall, “Defensive Realism and the Concert of Europe,” Review of International Studies, Vol. 32, Issue #3 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, July 2006), 523–540.

9 Ibid., 523-540. 8

Unable to bear this situation, Chopin left Vienna a few days later and arrived in Paris in mid-

September of 1831.10

Chopin headed to Paris, where the economy and politics were rapidly changing since the

Industrial Revolution. Victor-Marie Hugo (1802-1885), Heinrich Heine (1797-1856), and

Eugène Delacroix (1798-1863) were the main figures in the Parisian art world. Virtuoso pianist- composers such as Franz Liszt (1811-1886), Friedrich Wilhelm Michael Kalkbrenner (1785-

1849), and Charles-Valentin Alkan (1813-1888) were the musical contemporaries in Paris.11

At the time, the piano was the leading instrument in concert culture in Europe.

Composers published symphonies, operas, and chamber music. Those works were then arranged even for solo piano, and it became a trend for the audience to listen to multiple versions of the same piece. This played a big role in the music industry’s growth and naturally resulted in the congregation of pianists in Paris. In 1832, Chopin gained a reputation as a prominent piano pedagogue in Paris and garnered a prosperous and lucrative life.12 Besides, he participated in several public concerts—he held benefit concerts with Liszt and his private concerts.13

While some of the remaining records of Chopin’s health contain exaggerated rumors, most of them remain true. For example, in Heidelberg, where Chopin stayed for a while after visiting Leipzig in 1835, rumors circulated that he died due to severe illness. In 1837, Chopin became close to George Sand (1804-1876), who provided psychological and economic support to Chopin for the next nine years. Chopin and Sand went to Mallorca for recovery, but the harsh

10 James Huneker, Chopin the Man and His Music, 32-34.

11 Ibid., 34-36.

12 J. Cuthbert Hadden, Chopin, 59.

13 James Huneker, Chopin the Man and His Music, 37-38. 9

environment made Chopin’s illness worse. Chopin went back and forth between Nohant and

Paris to participate in musical activities.14 Chopin often played with the musicians around him, such as soprano Pauline Viardot (1821-1910) and Auguste Franchomme (1808-1884), but there is no official record of public performances from 1843 for five years.

The conflict with the Sand family arose in 1845, then, two years later, the two broke up.15

A different social situation brought about by the Paris Commune in 1848 threatened the music market because it relied on the nobility and the middle-class. As a consequence, the number of students decreased significantly.16 In April of the same year, Chopin’s life became difficult, and he left for England upon the suggestion of Jane Stirling (1804-1859), one of his students. During his visits to England and Scotland, Chopin’s health worsened, and he returned to Paris with an extremely weakened condition.17 Chopin passed away on October 17th, 1849, at the age of 39, after suffering most of his life from bronchitis and tuberculosis.18

14 J. Cuthbert Hadden, Chopin, 69-71.

15 Ibid., 87-89.

16 Ibid., 96.

17 Ibid., 100-108.

18 Ibid., 115. 10

The Cultural Environment and Bourgeois in the Nineteenth Century

Peter Watson, the author of German Genius, argues that the end of the eighteenth century to the middle of the nineteenth century was the most decisive period for the establishment of modern western science. While most of the attention paid to European researchers and universities in the previous century was the “preservation and transfer,” in

Europe from 1790 to 1840, the consciousness that “creative processes and achievements” were also important to academic research. Therefore, natural sciences, physics, history, and linguistics began to be recognized as independent disciplines, and each discipline began to come up with a core problem that would dominate the twentieth century.19

At the same time, music was claimed to be one of the independent research fields.

Friedrich Chrysander, Guido Adler and Philipp Spitta, tried to recognize music as an independent study by creating the first musicology journal, Vierteljahrschrift für

Musikwissenschaft. Since ancient Greek, the philosophy of musicology was an important concept for most of the history of music, but after the nineteenth century, music became an independent study.20 Meanwhile, due to the reflection of the “national consciousness” that prevailed in

European countries in the nineteenth century, interest in music and aesthetics of music has increased; the historical musicology was established. Music education in central European countries, especially at universities in German-speaking regions, had been standardized, and music had also been combined with various other studies.

19 Peter Watson, German Genius-Europe’s Third Renaissance, the Second Scientific Revolution, and the Twentieth Century (Australia: HarperCollins Publishers Inc, 2010), 339-341.

20 Vincent Duckles, “Musicology.” The Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. 2nd ed. edited by Stanley Sadie, vol.12 (London: Macmillan Publishers Ltd, 2002). 11

The cultural market in the nineteenth century was also on the rise. Until the eighteenth century, the cultural ecosystem was almost entirely “production” by professional musicians and

“consumption” by minority intellectuals and nobles. However, the growth of the market coupled with the growth of the middle-class in the nineteenth century expanded the range to those who wanted to enjoy music. The supply gap caused by an unprecedentedly widened market was often squeezed into the “cheap art” of second-class intellectuals, rubbish writers, and pampered artists, but there was a positive side brought about by this new ecosystem. First, with increased cultural interest in the nineteenth century, citizens’ awareness of society grew, it shifted from the Latin language-centered cultural landscape to the native language-centered culture, and the school education system had put much effort on standardizing on considerable numbers of people that could have the ability of literacy proficiency. The increase in periodicals, including magazines, has also greatly contributed to the change in this cultural landscape.21

Many aspects make sense of the middle-class in the 1800s, but above all, it is special that these Victorian people were aware that they were now in the midst of a rapidly changing world. Everything was developing very fast in the nineteenth century, and the latest information was overflowing every day. The middle-class wanted to know about the changes in science, society, culture, reformation, and art, monopolized by the elite and had a strong will to improve their consciousness through changes. The best tool for this revolution was reading books. The intellectual reading trend that transcends hierarchies was sometimes replaced by the term ‘the reading revolution.’22 Even before the eighteenth century, there were books published, but books

21 Donald Sassoon, The Culture of the Europeans – from 1800 to the Present (London: HarperCollins Publishers Inc, 2006), 381- 382.

22 Peter Watson, German Genius-Europe’s Third Renaissance, the Second Scientific Revolution, and the Twentieth Century, 105- 112.

12

were still expensive until the development of the international market through railroads in

1847.23 It was a slow information distribution and was only for those of elites. Instead of books, magazines and periodicals were relatively advantageous information to quench intellectual thirst.24

By the end of the seventeenth century and the beginning of the eighteenth century, the total amount of periodicals published increased exponentially. For example, the publication of periodicals in German-speaking countries was about 260 in 1745; in 1785, it increased by about four times to 1225.25 The topics covered by periodicals also varied. Literary and political magazines became mainstream, but they also played a documentary introducing thesis, books, and cultural events. It is normal for the middle-class to have much interest in culture, especially music. One of them is the famous Neue Zeitschrift für Musik, published in 1834 by Robert

Schumann (1810-1856) at his age of 24. There was a wide variety of information on music covered in this magazine, including music, especially the scene from the novel Kreislers musikalisch-poetischer Klub (Kreisler’s Musical-Poetical Club) by Ernst Theodor Amadeus

Hoffmann (commonly abbreviated as E.T.A. Hoffmann); the scene contains the characteristics and impressions on individual keys.

The Kreisleriana is quoted from the final collection of Hoffmann’s four volumes of

Fantasiestücke in Callots Manier (Fantasy Pieces in the Manner of Callot). The story created by the master of Romantic fantasy novel features a fictitious character, Kapellmeister Johannes

Kreisler, a symbol of the internally divided artist and, from the perspective of ordinary others,

23 Orlando Figes, The Europeans (New York: Metropolitan Books Henry Holt and Company, 2019), 16.

24 Donald Sassoon, The Culture of the Europeans – from 1800 to the Present, 381-382.

25 Peter Watson, German Genius-Europe’s Third Renaissance, the Second Scientific Revolution, and the Twentieth Century, 107. 13

has a strange personality of antisocial tendencies. Still, with ingenious wit, he was a figure that can surprise people. (The piano work Kreisleriana, which Schumann composed using this fictitious protagonist as a subject, is widely known.) The main character in the novel, Kreisler, is trying to play in a cafe filled with people. At that time, an accident occurred, and the candle fell into pieces and shattered into the piano keys; therefore, the piano was badly damaged. However, this kind of incident could not stop this fanatic musician. Kreisler still plays piano with the remaining keys, creating a completely demonic sound of music.

As mentioned before, the piano in front of Kreisler is now badly damaged. Therefore, the tune he can play with his wit is a limited number of strings. Hoffmann poeticizes the twelve chords that Kreisler was forced to choose and the fantastic images that they created.26 The chords appearing in “Kreisler’s events,” even if a single chord is accompanied by a particular dynamic, transforming into a unique character. Even if it is played in the form of an inversion, it can be transformed in a completely different sound tendency. Among the literary representations of Hoffmann’s composition, some examples are: in the scene of Kreisler playing A-flat major chords of pianissimo, the author expressed it as a series of miraculous rustles with strange vibes.

“What is it that rustles so miraculously, so strangely around me? Invisible wings glide up and down. I am swimming in and ethereal fragrance. But the fragrance shines in flaming circles, mysteriously intertwining. They are tender spirits, moving their golden wings in magnificently voluminous tones and chords.”27

26 Rita Steblin, A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries, 146-149. “A-flat major chord of pp, A-flat minor of mf, E major first inversion chord of ancora piu f, E major chord of f, A minor chord with arpeggio dolce, F major chord, B-flat major chord with accentuato, B-flat major chord with smanioso, E-flat major chord of f, G major seventh second inversion chord of p, C major chord of ff, several C minor chords of ff.”

27 Rita Steblin, Ibid., 147. 14

In the novel, Kreisler is very focused on his performance, and his whining words continue. In the passage where this narcissistic Kapellmeister plays E major emotions accompanied by f, he portrays himself as a person wearing a “grand crown” honored by those who admired his music.

“They have offered me a magnificent crown! But those diamonds sparkling in it are in reality the thousand tears which I have shed, and in its gold shine the flames which have consumed me. Courage and strength to him who is destined to reign in the realm of spirits!”28

Kreisler thinks that the praise he gets from people in this little café is the result of his own blood and tear-stained training by his efforts. The shining diamond stands for his real tears, and those tears are earned from his all hard work. The sparks from the mirror are gold, and he portrays it in poetic language. What remains for this great victorious conqueror is a merrymaking and delightful dance feast. The sentence quoted below is also Kreisler’s self-declaration, and the most appropriate musical language for this declaration is a chord in the key of C major accompanied with ff.

“But let us dance with furious frenzy over the open graves. Let us rejoice! They cannot hear down there. Hurrah! Hurrah! Dancing and rejoicing! The devil is coming with trumpets and drums!”29

Hoffmann’s novel Kreislers musikalisch-poetischer Klub shows the character’s many emotions towards Kreisler’s situations throughout the story of events. It portrays the protagonist

28 Ibid., 147.

29 Ibid., 148. 15

Kapellmeister very well, who is bizarre and rough. His innate talent helps him to go through many incidents in the story. Another point to note in Hoffmann’s novel that Schumann is citing is that, through dialogue in the book, it is mentioned that certain keys will exhibit more unique characteristics if associated with particular instruments. For example, it describes the justification of the key of B-flat major associated with the flute, the instrumentation of rationality of the horn accompanying E-flat major, and the effects of the trumpet and drum associated with

C major.

In the nineteenth century, Hoffmann’s novel about the ‘disruption’ that the conflicting elements of ‘fantasy and reality,’ and the music mentioned in the text, especially his poetic expressions related to composition, remain curious. Whether this was the common opinion of the musicians of the nineteenth century or whether it was just expressions of Hoffmann’s thoughts and experiences, those were unsure. However, it needs to be emphasized that the unique notion of key characterized in Hoffmann’s novel is important. (Not just because Schumann is referring to his book in Neue Zeitschrift für Musik) As is widely known, Hoffmann was a writer and composer, a music critic (of course, he was also a lawyer), and in 1806 as a judge in Warsaw. He was a “Renaissance man” of that era who also worked as an orchestra conductor. From his perspective, both a writer and a professional musician are an important record and testimony to the nineteenth-century artistic trend and musical aesthetics. An individual becomes “an expert” means that a group accepts him/her with particular expertise as a person capable of

“corresponding” to the ideas and order of that group. (The guild in Medieval and Renaissance is a good example.) Hoffmann’s career as a professional musician means, therefore, that he is a person who understands the traditional notions and order that music has been pursuing, or at least, to some extent, “conforms to conventions.” 16

One evidence of Hoffmann’s familiarity with the musical conventions can be found in his novel, mentioning the combination of certain instruments and certain compositions. For example, the horn matches well with the E-flat key due to the nature of the instrument and has been proven through several works. In musical works, the horn is appropriate and even heroic to evoke the image of hunting. (Beethoven’s Symphony No.3, Op.55 in E-flat major, is probably a well- known example.) Hoffmann’s connection of the C major to the trumpet and drum is also widely known as orchestration.30 For a long time, many composers have considered the key of C major is a musically suitable combination for the description of dancing, rejoicing, festivals, and military marches.

As already mentioned, Hoffmann’s notion of key affections has appeared in the literature of music theorists and debate-loving art lovers for generations. Steblin calls this a kind of “lists” about key affects or “descriptions.” For example, the notion of key characters in “the Hoffmann key affect” has a lot in common with the key descriptions of Christian Friedrich Daniel Schubart

(1739-1791), a pre-generation music scholar. Hoffmann quoted Schubart’s article “if ghosts could speak, they would have to speak in this key” in implying the key of E-flat minor in a review of Beethoven’s Christus am Ö lberge (1812). He also added self-expression of “it is frigid, gripping, and convulsive clanging.”31

In addition to Hoffmann and Schubart, the lists of specific ideas in individual key characteristics remain in several literature pieces. There is a kind of “intersection of awareness” that transcends the times between each document’s key affections. The catalogue by Steblin contains information from early archivists on the notion of key characters, such as Jean

30 Samuel Adler, The Study of Orchestration. 3rd ed. (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2002), 358.

31 Rita Steblin, A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries, 149. 17

Rousseau’s list to Hector Berlioz’s list in 1843. We have witnessed what kind of cognitive changes an individual key has caused by generation through this catalogue. Naturally, the same language, idea, and consciousness have cultural understanding and differences in time and space.

In Steblin’s catalogue, for example, the key of C major in the late 1600s is the expression of

‘aggressive (militant)’ or ‘impertinent (impudent),’ with the impression of ‘careless (gay things)’32 or ‘bright and showy.’ The key of C major is still observed in literature from the early

1700s. However, some semantic changes are detected in the documents of subsequent generations. For example, in Mattheson’s document in 1719 Exemplarische Organisten-Probe, C major is “most common of all,” and this key is often “said to be a sound that can evoke the emotion of touching.” In J. P. Rameau’s famous treatise Traité de l’harmoniein (1722), he explains the key of C major in the sense of ‘merriment’ (Songs of mirth and rejoicing). In general, after the middle of 1770, it is understood that the key of C major has the meaning of splendid. In the second half of the century, C major is shown as ‘cheerful’ to ‘pure,’ and it is understood as an image of ‘innocence.’ In the literature that appeared in the nineteenth century, concepts derived from the past and additional images were mixed, and the key of C major stood for “cheerful,” “purity,” “majesty,” “simplicity.”33 In particular, some literature recognizes this key as “the basis of all further development.”34

In Steblin’s research, the perception from that era about the key of E major also maintains a relatively consistent. The emotions about E major by Charpentier (1692) are

“argumentative (quarrelsome)” and “noisy (clamorous).” It also served as a relatively “consistent

32 Oxford Dictionary of English 3rd Revised ed. “gay,” (London: Oxford University Press España, S.A., 2010).

33 Rita Steblin, A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries, 226-229

34 Ferdinand Hand, Asthetik der Tonkunst, 1837, cited from Rita Steblin, 230.. 18

prejudice” to musicians and scholars of the following century. In 1777, C. L. Junker classified the key of E major as “inspiring (uplifting)” composition in his book Tonkunst, and this key character is described in many subsequent works of literature as “piercing,” “wild,” “heavenly life,” “bright,” “penetrating,” “brilliancy,” “martial,” and “joyful.” If there is a case in which is mentioning the impression of E major shows an unusually large difference, “not wild, but rather moderate ardour,” “steadiness,” “firmness,” and “prudent courage” expressed by G. F. Ebhardt

(Die höhern Lehrzweige der Tonsetzkunst, 1830). One interesting impression is that some literature mentions that E major is affected by tempo. For example, J. A. Schrader argues that E major has senses of “terror” and “horror” when the key is played at a fast tempo, also it has the impression of “fire” and “wildness.” However the key is insisted that emotion of “tenderness” in a slow tempo in his Kleines Taschenwörtenbuch der Musik (1827).35

One of the most striking expressions about the key of A-flat major is the document by R.

M.? Bacon from the Quarterly Musical Magazine & Review in 1821. The author expressed the key of A-flat major as a tonal with a ‘lugubrious effect,’ and related to the words “gloomy,”

“black(night),” “sad,” “melancholy,” “solemn,” “sorrowful,” “serious,” and “funeral” has been recognized as images related to A-flat major through several generations. Sometimes the key of

A-flat major is expressed as an emotion of the “majesty of king and queen,” and W. S. Gardiner describes in his 1817 book Life of Haydn, the key of A-flat major as having an image of an

“unassuming gentle” and “soft” and “delicate” love. Nevertheless, the most widely known character for A-flat major is “key of the grave” (Schubart, Glöggl), and this key has been considered a death-related impression such as “dark” and “ominous.” On the other hand, there is

35 Rita Steblin, A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries, 251-256. 19

an interesting document of the key of G# major in the enharmonic relationship with the key of

A-flat major. For example, G. Schilling and F. Hand explain an example of a completely different aesthetic meaning of G# major through a scene by Beethoven’s Fidelio. It claims that it is a constitutive expression of fear and unstable psychology.

G# major has a totally different expression, although its intervals, when tempered, completely coincide with those of A-flat major in mathematical or physical respect. Rocco shudders in it, and at the same time, Pizarro rejoices in his heart as he gives the former the commission and afterward decides to murder the prisoner himself.36

As C major and G major, having a simpler key signature, the more information is in the catalogue, and many key characters of A minor are transmitted. In Steblin’s study, the oldest documented mention of A minor was left by J. Rousseau in 1691 in Méthode claire, which

Rousseau described to A minor as an allusion of “serious subjects.” Although the character assigned to the key of A minor shows relatively diverse emotions according to generations nevertheless, the general sentiment for this key is “tender” and “mournful (plaintive),” somewhat

“feminine softness, but grief.” After the nineteenth century, “sorrow,” “plaintive,” or “piety” often appeared as related words for the key of A minor. Some of these expressions are quite peculiar, such as the expression “the most naïve of all” left by André Ernest Modeste Grétry in

1797,37 and “plaintive, but not feeble” left by W. Gardiner in 1817.38 As a result, the notion of

A minor is becoming more interesting.

36 Gustav Schilling, Universal-Lexicon der Tonkunst (Stuttgart: F.H. Köhler, 1835-36), cited from Steblin, 279.

37 Grétry, André-Ernest-Modeste. Mémoires, ou Essais sur las musique. Paris: l'imprimerie de la République, 1796/1797 (Republican year 5).

38 Ibid., 20

It has already been revealed in the introduction that Steblin’s research was very helpful for studying the key characteristics of Chopin’s music. Steblin’s research focuses on key characteristics recognized in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, and the aesthetic meaning of individual keys is provided in the literature. The yearbooks of the collected literature start from roughly two periods, when relatively simple key signatures were used (for example, closely-related keys based on the key of C major), that is, when meantone temperament was more dominant, from later Baroque writings such as Rousseau and Charpentier, written in the late 1600s. Of course, not all documents of this period exclude all references of “complex” keys.

For example, Charpentier also mentions the key of E-flat minor or B-flat minor, which has a parallel key relationship with E-flat major or B-flat major. In contrast, when more “complex” keys (such as C# major, C# minor, F# major, F# minor, Etc., which began to be used only in the late eighteenth or nineteenth century) appeared, meantone temperament and well temperament were still mixed, or a period closer to well or equal temperament.

A certain pattern is shown in each catalogue of the twenty-four key characteristics by

Steblin. First, there are cases where different expressions or thoughts often appear in the notions and impressions of individuals entangled in one key, but there are consistent impressions and expressions. For example, from the late seventeenth to the early nineteenth century, whether it is gentle or extreme, the expression most often referred to as C minor’s key character was

“lament.”39 On the other hand, the impressions that accompanied the key of D minor during the same time were “tender” and “melancholy.” As such, two minor keys have been recognized as groups of different nuances for many generations, despite the difference in “barely” whole step.

39 Rita Steblin, A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries, 230-234. 21

On the other hand, words expressing each key’s impression for 150 years before the mid- nineteenth century are related. For example, Charpentier expresses E-flat major’s impression in a

“cruel and hard” literature in 1692. Mattheson in 1719 expressed this group as a “majestic” impression, G. J. Vogler in 1778 expressed the key of E-flat major as “dark,” and J. H. Knecht in

1792 expressed “splendid and solemn” in 1796. F. Galeazzi of “Heroic” is expressed as a character of E-flat major, and the Hand of 1837 expressed the impression of “powerful proclamation” on the key of E-flat major. It shows that it has been consistently recognized as the concept of key characteristics with “cruel,” “dark,” but “majestic,” “heroic,” and “declaration.”40

The impression that each group has a relevance means that there is a common notion, such as a kind of ‘group unconscious,’ is latent and flowing under the perception of each key characters, and these ‘homogeneous prejudices’ is the result of cultural learning that has been made across generations.

40 Ibid., 245-249. 22

The Transformation of the Pitch Level and Temperament System until Chopin’s Time

The Transformation of the Pitch Level

One definition of music is ‘well-organized sound,’ and the ‘organizing’ in art goes through ‘adjustment’ in an aesthetic sense. In this respect, music is distinct from the sounds and noises of nature. Organizing is the result of “agreement” among experts, musicians, instrument makers, music theorists. For example, there have been numerous time-consuming experiments, modeling, and standardization efforts before introducing an A=440Hz, the ‘organized standard.’

Since the 1830s, when consensus on pitch level was almost reached, differences between regions, performing venues, and individuals had been significantly reduced.41 (The 1830s was when Chopin, the main issue of this study, began acting as a professional musician.) Before the

1800s, several experiments and attempts in Central Europe’s music created a “temperament system.” The standard pitch level and temperament system were both issues that emerged during the formation of modernistic music, but in fact, pitch standard is more artificial and therefore slightly distant from the nature of music. On the other hand, the temperament system is intended to solve the “musical irony” in keyboard instruments or between the keyboard and other instruments, thus becoming a more natural matter.

The hertz (Hz) is the derived unit of frequency in the International System of Units (SI) and is defined as one cycle per second (also known as cps). As mentioned earlier, there is a

41 Bruce Haynes, A History of Performing Pitch: The Story of “A,” 343. 23

‘valued standard’ promised since 1939 at A=440Hz. However, in the absence of physical units, the pitch level varied widely by locality. For example, the concert pitch was distinguished by

Ton d’Opéra or Ton d’Écurie for the performance venue, or, more specifically, classified

Chorton (Choir tone) or Cammerton (Chamber tone), which provided a relationship between the pitch levels that the ensemble should base on.42

The pitch level of Cammerton, which name is still applied in Germany today to mean a musical pitch standard, has been truly different from local to local and from musician to musician for centuries. An A pitch level presented by Michael Praetorius (1571-1621) referred to

Cammerton as ‘CammerThon,’ in his Syntagma Musicum (1614-1620) is approximately 465Hz today, which was generally the standard for instrumental music at his time.43 The lower A pitch was in the mid-seventeenth century when French wind instruments began to flow in German- speaking countries. Because of these newly imported instruments, Cammerton’s pitch level was lower than the previous era, either in whole-step or a little lower.44

Problems caused by the absence of a standard valued pitch began to arise from scores that began to spread throughout Europe and musicians who began to travel to various regions to build their careers. As the region expanded and exchanges became more active, musicians and scores became more widespread than in the previous era. Musical instruments with different traditions in different regions have caused pitch level problems, which would occur during the ensemble process.45 Transposition was a quick way to solve this problem. This practice

42 Ibid, xxxiv.

43 Trevor Herbert, The Trombone (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2006, 87.

44 Bruce Haynes, “Cammerton” Grove Music Online accessed on March 4, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/97815692630.article.04666.

45 Bruce Haynes, A History of Performing Pitch: The Story of “A,” xxxv. 24

continued in the next century, and in the eighteenth century, 2 to 3 instruments with different pitch standards coexisted simultaneously in one ensemble. According to recent studies, Handel and Mozart, the most international musicians of the eighteenth century, preferred a certain pitch level, with Handel preferred A=423Hz and Mozart preferred A=422Hz. (Approximately one-half semitone lower than 440Hz.)46 In the eighteenth century, it was common practice for organists to transpose the Chorton-tuned organ into the Cammerton. In other words, for example, if instruments except the organ played in C, the organist would lower the major second by himself.

The problem caused by regional differences in the concert pitch was more serious in playing winds. The use of different pitch standards naturally affected soundings and this difference in some cases also affect the performer’s physical body. As Herbert W. Myers, an expert at

Renaissance wind instruments, explained, if cornett performers with a concert pitch of 440Hz had to play with nearly a half-step higher, they had to stretch their fingers to the tone holes placement.47

The primary condition of internationalization is standardization. In the eighteenth century, the standardization of European music began in the First Industrial Revolution. Until the mid-eighteenth century, machines were introduced to manufacture hand-crafted instruments and began mass production. In particular, there was a big change in piano manufacturing. In the

1770s, Broadwood & Sons, a keyboard manufacturer in London, manufactured only twenty pianos per year. By 1800, they had produced 400, and by 1850, they were able to 2,000 per year.48 In the 1830s, the performing pitch levels, which European musicians and institutions had

46 Alexander J. Ellis in Studies in the History of Music Pitch: Monographs by Alexander J. Ellis and Arthur Mendel. Amsterdam: Frits Knuf, 1968; New York: Da Capo Press, 23.

47 Bruce Haynes, A History of Performing Pitch: The Story of “A,” xl.

48 Donald Jay Grout, A History of Western Music. 9th ed. (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2014), 590. 25

already chosen, were relatively stable, and in 1858, the French Commission established a uniform musical pitch. However, in effect, the stabilization of pitch levels was largely attributed to keyboard instruments’ mass production.49 While other instruments, which still insisted on hand-crafted manufacturing, had been greatly influenced by regions and individual makers, however, the piano had a relatively constant pitch level compared to other instruments.

In Paris in the mid-1830s, when Chopin was active, the pitch level was between 435Hz and 443Hz. The pitch levels differed slightly depending on the instruments, ensembles, and performing venues, but the piano’s pitch level remained relatively constant. In 1836, the piano’s pitch level in Wölfel Studio (in Paris) was 443Hz. In 1859, Adrien de La Fage (1801-1862) wrote: “The pianos of Erard are thus always a bit lower than those of Pleyel. No artist who has had to play in the halls of these two famous firms has failed to notice this.” Chopin preferred the

Pleyel, and he owned the Pleyel grand of 1839. His piano had a 446Hz pitch level because it was produced before 1854 (before this year, it is known that Pleyel’s pianos were made to 446Hz), and Chopin’s works from the 1820s to 1840s were probably composed by the piano tuned slightly higher than 440Hz.50

The Transformation of the Temperament System

The two most basic considerations for tuning keyboard instruments are 1) to decide which pitch level to choose as the standard, 2) to decide which temperament to use. It is a matter

49 Bruce Haynes, A History of Performing Pitch: The Story of “A,” 343.

50 Ibid., 347. 26

of how to determine the frequency ratio of twelve notes of the musical scale. Once the level of this pitch is determined, the rest of the octaves are tuned to this.

Although widely known, there is no absolutely 'accurate' or 'best' temperament in music; all tuning results from a certain level of 'compromising.' It depends on what kind of music or instrument player needs to play. Unlike the identifiable differences at various pitch levels, the difference in temperament is not crystal clear to the untrained listener.51

Temperament in music did not contribute conclusively to forming a modernistic music view, but a more improved temperament method was indeed needed in tonal music. The first demand appeared during the early Renaissance. As several instruments became ensembles simultaneously and the third intervals became more common, especially the out-of-tune major thirds, the most vulnerable point in tuning using the Pythagorean system became a problem. This dissonance is often referred to as the “wolf fifth,” and the subsequent history of temperament is a history of efforts to improve wolf-intervals.

Just intonation is a temperament that improves the weak third intervals, sets one ‘good key’ first whenever coordinated, and tunes the keyboard in this ‘open’ way. This temperament improves the vulnerable thirds that occur in the Pythagorean system.52 The problem is that using just intonation makes it difficult to use various keys. For just intonation to be used successfully, music had to be used only for closely-related keys in harmony. For example, music’s sound deteriorated very badly when A-flat major was played on an open tuning harpsichord around justly C major. The limited use of tonality that was the just intonation would cause a big problem at that time, as harmony and tonality in this era were still limited in their use. However, it was

51 E. Richard Berg and David G. Stork, The Physics of Sound. 3rd ed., 238.

52 Ibid., 239. 27

difficult to prevent the key’s intonation from clearly deteriorating in the just intonation to express music with more complex keys. On the other hand, a ‘closed’ temperament was a way of tuning according to the average that would fit much more keys, but it was also not a suitable way that would be equally applicable to all keys.53

Meantone temperament appeared around the 1500s, was a more suitable temperament method for expanding harmonies. While this method was a temperament of the well-tuned fifth, which was the basis of the Pythagorean system in the previous era, it was also a “hybrid temperament” that was supplemented with a kind of open system through the quarter-comma meantone temperament.54

Meanwhile, in the seventeenth century, the well temperament, which emphasizes the advantages of closed temperament that appeared in the previous era, the average match for all keys, began to be used. The well temperament advocated by Andreas Werckmeister (1645-1706) led to the emergence of keyboard works by many composers, which allowed the idea of music with various key signatures “compromised” among keys. The Well-Tempered Clavier by J. S.

Bach is a representative piece created by applying the closed temperament.55

The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were the experimental appearance of several types of closed temperaments, some of which were successfully accepted. One of the most powerful surviving temperaments is the equal-tempered scale. This new closed temperament method was first introduced in the early seventeenth century but was not a widespread system in

Europe. Many musicians still preferred the meantone temperament, and the two different tuning

53 Ibid., 239.

54 Ibid., 239.

55 Ibid., 239-240. 28

methods of these closed and open temperaments existed simultaneously for a considerable period.56 Musicians, or some keyboard makers, such as Jean Denis, argued in his “Traite de

I’accord de I’espinette (1643)” that the meantone, or open temperament method, was more musical tuning.57 Besides, most organs maintained an unequal closed temperament throughout the eighteenth century, and this trend continued into the mid-nineteenth century.

Nevertheless, by the nineteenth century, almost all instruments have adopted equal temperament. This closed temperament is a tuning system between any two notes with the same interval by applying the same frequency ratio, so all semitones present in the scale are the same.

The problem was that this temperament method had a kind of “contradiction” that occurred by defining the distance of all two notes with the same interval. However, in terms of the absolute pitch level, they are all different. As this temperament satisfies all the keys, there is a problem that none of the keys are pure. In the Baroque era, the equal temperament caused musical rejection. Over the next 200 years, however, musical context changes have led to the continued use of equal temperament, particularly after Romanticism in the nineteenth century, of various tonality and modulations.58

The willingness to apply equal temperament to instruments was stronger among keyboard makers. The piano producer James Broadwood introduced his piano in 1811, arguing that his manufacturing to follow equal temperament could better represent the harmony. The argument of Broadwood shows that equal temperament was becoming a standard in this era, and in fact, such a tendency was strongly manifested. Even for an organ that was not likely to apply

56 Ibid., 239-240.

57 Vincent J. Panetta, trans and ed. Treatise on Harpsichord Tuning by Jean Denis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 4.

58 E. Richard Berg and David G. Stork, The Physics of Sound. 3rd ed., 240-241. 29

the equal temperament in any case, this musical tuning system began to be used more and more.

After introducing the equal temperament organ by German makers in the Great Exhibition in

1851, some local organs still preferred to meantone, but many organ makers began to present the organ by equal temperament.59 Throughout this historical process, after the 1800s, equal temperament had remained the basic tuning system of keyboard instruments.

59 Ross W. Duffin, in Chapter 7 “Some Are More Equal Than Others,” How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony (and Why You Should Care) (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2007). 30

CHAPTER III.

ANALYSIS OF KEY CHARACTERISTICS IN CHOPIN’S PIANO MUSIC

The Key of A-flat Major

Steblin’s catalog of A-flat major affective descriptions contains 30 documents from the late eighteenth century (Vogler, 1779) to the mid-nineteenth century (Berlioz, 1843) a relatively later document. Vogler described A-flat major’s character as a ‘plutonic realm.’ The changes in impression in Steblin’s references can be roughly divided into three periods: 1) the late 1700s, 2) early 1800s, and 3) after 1828. The impression of A-flat major in the documents has been initially expressed as having a grave or gloomy tendency, focusing on the ‘dark’ tones of the flat key, but has been perceived as a softer and more friendly type of key. The following Table 1 summarizes the changes in the A-flat major perspectives listed in the catalog, and the expressions highlighted by the bold type on the right side of the Table 1 show the most frequently cited words. A small number of opinions or expressions were excluded.

31

Table 1

The Change of Key of A-flat Major Impression60

Period Impressions Most frequent impressions

grave, death, judgement,

majesty (of Kings and later 1700s grave, majesty queens), black like the night,

gloomy

solemn, gentle night, strange

mood, gentle, soft, delicate, early 1800s tender, gloomy love, tender, dull and serious

very gloomy, dark, ominous

tender, dark, grave, soft, After 1828 tender, dark, grave veiled, very noble

A-flat major is the most popular key throughout Chopin’s work. Of the 94 major mode works by Chopin, 20 of them are written in the key of A-flat major, over 20% of his major-mode output (approximately 21.28%).

It should be noted that most of Chopin’s works modulate to at least one secondary key area during the piece, and this change of key usually has some impact on the musical character.

(The Sonata form is such an immediate example.) Nevertheless, the representative key of the

60 Rita Steblin, A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries, 276-280. 32

work has an overriding influence on the overall character of the work. This is especially true for his favorite key of A-flat major. Briefly, Chopin’s A-flat major can be divided into three categories: 1) tender or intimate, 2) grave or gloomy, and 3) majestic or solemn.

The following is a list of 20 works with A-flat major as the primary key.

1) Character of tender or intimate: Mazurkas Op.7 No.4, Etudes Op.10 No.10, Mazurkas

Op.24 No.3, Etudes Op.25 No.1, Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.17, Impromptu Op.29,

Nocturnes Op.32 No.2, Mazurkas Op.41 No.3, Waltz Op.42, Tarantella Op.43, Ballade

Op.47, Mazurkas Op59 No.2, Waltzes Op.64 No.3 (13 pieces total)

2) Character of grave or gloomy: Sonata Op.4 movement III, Mazurkas Op.17 No.3,

Mazurkas Op.50 No.2, Waltzes Op.69 No.1 (L’Adieu) (4 pieces total)

3) Character of majestic or solemn: Waltzes Op.34 No.1(Valse Brillante), Polonaise Op.53

(Héroïque), Polonaise-Fantasie Op.61 (3 pieces total)

The Character of ‘Tender’ or ‘Intimate’

Of Chopin’s twenty works in the key of A-flat major, thirteen pieces (65%) have tender or intimate characters, the most common character in works with this key. Among Chopin’s A- flat major works, a tender impression commonly has the following characteristics: 1) The number of voices representing primary melody becomes relatively simple, or if textures are somewhat complicated, the remaining voices are homophonic, 2) like the ‘song without words,’ the range of melody maintains the tone of the human voice (this is one of the proofs that Chopin’ 33

music was influenced by opera in the nineteenth century), 3) overall, the dynamics of music are reduced or simplified, and 4) the melodic contour is primarily stepwise rather than jagged or leaping.

Impromptu, Op.29 (c.1837) is a good example of work that reveals tender and intimate tendencies. The primary melody appears in a limited range (in other words, ‘sing-able’), and the piece’s dynamics are relatively limited. The allegro, played almost at the presto’s speed, creates an intimate and cheerful atmosphere due to the triplet’s continuous progression, which suggests a pastoral 9/8 meter. Both two hands are relatively simple in their textures, each configured a single voice.

Example 1: Impromptu Op. 29 (c1837) mm.1-4

As previously explained about tender and intimate tendencies, even if the primary melody is accompanied by harmonizing chords, the other voices accompanying the melody would follow as an ‘assistant’ of the homophonic texture method. The following example is the primary section (section A) of Waltzes, Op.34 No.1, known as ‘Valse Brillante.’ This is music by four phrases with a tender and intimate impression, and the alto-voice continues to follow, maintaining sixth intervals of the primary melody. In Example 2, the direction of intonation has been excluded, but other versions of the score often indicate dolce in m.17. 34

Example 2: Waltzes Op.34 No.1 ‘Valse Brillante’ (1835) mm. 17-24

Another work in which the melodic contour brings out a feeling of tender and intimate emotions is Nocturnes, Op.32 No. 2, 1837. This gentle yet intimate tendency’s piece sings an intimate emotion with a melody reminiscent of an opera’s aria.

Example 3: Nocturnes Op.32 No.2 (1837) mm. 3-6

The overall tendency of decreasing or simplifying dynamics is also a musical feature of tender and intimate. For example, the following beginning of Mazurkas Op.59 No.2 in Example 35

4 is intended to be played without any dynamic instruction.61 As in the preceding cases, this work appears in very constrained melodic range. Another similar example is Mazurkas, Op.50

No.2 in 1842.

Example 4: Mazurkas Op.59 No.2 (1845) mm. 1-9

Twenty-four Preludes, Op. 28, No. 17 (1836) is another example of melodic contours that maintain a sing-able register also with simple dynamics. The piece requires delicate dynamics based on p with a simple accompaniment as an assistant role to the primary melody, although the right hand’s textures are increasing after m.3. In addition to this work, the dynamics in Mazurkas, Op.24 No.3 (1833), are also very simple.

Example 5: Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.17 (1836) mm. 1-6

61 The first edition by Maurice Schlesinger (1846) also omitted the dynamic indication. 36

When louder dynamics appear early on in these works, they are often used to prepare for a fairly regular, rather simple formula of dynamics. In Example 6, Mazurkas, Op.7 No.4 is one of illustrative example. This piece uses a two-measure alteration of f and p to present a regular alternating contrast.

Example 6: Mazurkas Op.7 No.4 (1830-2) mm. 1-4

This tendency is also observed in Mazurkas, Op.24 No.3 (1833) and Op.41 No.4 (1839).

Op.24 No.3 features a familiar melody like a children’s tune with con anima at moderato, and

Op.41 No.4 is also a tender and intimate piece in which allegretto is played with the sentiment of dolce.

Among the characteristics of tender and intimate works mentioned earlier, works with stepwise melodic contour also show tender and intimate characters. This principle may appear as either major or minor seconds, or a mixture of the two. These melodic trends are also shown in the previously presented examples. Chopin’s Ballade, Op.47 (1841) in Example 7, also has this tendency. The primary melody in mm.1-2 maintains diatonic ascending seconds until the tonic of the strong beat in m.2. On the other hand, the first left hand beat of m. 3 (the primary melody transmitted to the left hand) also exhibits descending motions. This trend of melodic progressions also appears in Waltz, Op.42 composed in 1840. 37

Example 7: Ballade Op.47 (1841) mm. 1-4

Meanwhile, the first alternating section begins in m.52, an example of the earlier theme modified as a type of ‘retrograde,’ is a gentle manner of the diatonic scale in F major.

Example 8: Ballade Op.47 mm. 52-58

Melodic contours with these manners also appear in chromatic progressions. Etudes,

Op.10, No.10 in Example 9 features compound melody of chromatic ascending motion in the top voice and sooner shows a mixture of half-step and whole-step seconds.

38

Example 9: Etudes Op.10 No.10 (1830-2) mm. 1-2

Meanwhile, Tarantelle, Op. 43 (1841) is a fast and delightful miscellaneous work, in which the primary theme also expresses its intimate and cheery mood by the compound melody in the chromatic descending. Tarantelle, a very popular in Southern Italy, is a dance music that embodies a person who is bitten by a wolf spider and then unable to resist the pain. Lowe

Thompson (1929) describes the cheery nature of the work, saying that tarantelle is a work with traces of "Dianic or Dionysia cult."62

` Example 10: Tarantelle Op.43 (1841) mm. 1-7

62 R. Lowe Thompson, The History of the Devil (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., Ltd. 1929), 164. 39

The Character of ‘Grave’ or ‘Gloomy’

Of the twenty pieces in A-flat major composed by Chopin, four pieces (20%) tend to be grave or gloomy, which is the second most common usage of this key. Chopin’s music with a grave character in the key of A-flat major conveys the following characteristics: 1) A slow tempo is used as the main speed of the work. 2) The harmonic language is relatively diverse in musical units containing primary melody (this seems to increase the harmonic rhythm appearing inside the units due to the work’s slowness tempo). 3) The use of harmonies to arouse more intuitive emotions (e.g., borrowed chords, Neapolitan chords, etc.) appears earlier as the work begins. 4)

A funerary impression, one of Chopin’s musical favorites, is observed throughout his entire compositional output.

Sonata, Op.4, the first of his three sonatas, was dedicated to Joseph Elsner (1769-1854), a composition tutor when Chopin was a student at Warsaw Conservatoire. The sonata consists of a four-movement cycle. The third movement is a rare quintuple meter (5/4), with the impression of a typical grave playing molto espressione based on a slow tempo.

Example 11: Sonata Op.4 movement III (1827-8) mm. 1-4

40

Chopin had long focused on the grave character in his work, more specifically on funerary marches. Including his Funeral March, Op.72 No.2 in C minor, Twenty-four Preludes

Op.28 No.20, Fantasie Op.49, Nocturnes Op.37 No.1, Op.48 No.1, Op. 55 No.1 are also funeral marches or extended burial moods. In particular, his three piano sonatas, Op.35, Op.58, and the early Op.4, also designed funeral marches. On this trend, Anatole Leikin states that this is

Chopin’s favorite style and argues that such tastes seem to be influenced by Sonata Op.26,

“Marche funèbre” by Beethoven.63

The grave sentiment accompanied by a gloomy mood is a relationship like “two sides of the same coin.” Chopin’s Waltzes, Op.69 No.1(1835), a posthumous work nicknamed

“L’Adieu,” is known to be dedicated to Maria Wodzinéska (1819-1896), who was once one of

Chopin’s lovers.64 The eight-measure period, consisting of two phrases of four-measure units, has a strong sentiment and requires a gloomy expression on the dynamic of p. A D-natural accidental passing tone in upbeat of the very beginning, accompanied by the first inversion of subdominant on the left hand, and later, the appoggiatura on the second beat of the right hand in m.2, is supporting the impression of gloomy to work.

Example 12: Waltzes Op.69 No.1 (1835) mm. 1-8

63 Anatole Leikin, “The sonatas.” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, edited by Jim Samson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 161.

64 Maurice J. E. Brown, Chopin An Index of His Works in Chronological Order. 2nd ed. (London: Macmillan Education, 1972), 98-99. 41

It is not easy to get a clear answer as to whether the listener can immediately and intuitively perceive the emotions inherent in a musical work or rather perceives this through a conceptual or logical method. This is because the path of perception by which a listener understands musical expression goes through a very complicated process and is based on many subjective experiences. The nature and factors of emotion provided by music are very diverse and personal. However, there was a marked change in the nineteenth century as opposed to eighteenth-century Viennese sonatas, which were designed based on more conceptual and logical musical structures and composition. By contrast, some nineteenth-century operas express a more personal and expressive attitude rather than logical thinking. For instance, it is similar to not seeking the classical sonatas’ conceptualism from Nessun Dorma by Puccini.

Although many musical works are composed of carefully ‘invented’ and logically

‘designed’ pieces in the nineteenth-century, Romantic music’s attitude usually responds “first” to the flow of emotion, and Chopin’s music is a strong representative of this approach to composing. Howard Goodall argues that Chopin’s music has failed to provide ‘immediate influence’ in music history because Chopin’s music is ‘unusually intimate,’ because of ‘a delicacy and gentleness to Chopin’s.’ And Goodall also says that the music of Chopin represents the final curtain call of the age of elegance and gracefulness of sense and sensibility.65

Chopin used many different ways to express emotions immediately in his music, but

Mazurkas, Op.17 No.3, Lento assai, in 1833, perhaps, offers one of the typical methods. The beginning of this Polish-style dance starts with the third of the tonic in A-flat major based on the mood of dolce. The C5 lasts for a while through a short suspension until the strong beat in the

65 Howard Goodall, “The Age of Elegance and Sentiment 1750–1850,” The Story of Music (New York: Pegasus Bools LLC. 2013). 42

next measure, while the left hand of m.1 plays a fully diminished-seventh chord with accents and immediately resolves to the tonic in the next beat. The diminished-seventh chords, a companion chord of diatonic melody, are repeated ‘persistently’ over almost three measures, with friendly sentiments, but they also express calm and melancholy emotions. Mazurkas, Op.50 No.2 in 1842 is another example of this tendency.

Example 13: Mazurkas Op.17 No.3 (1833) mm. 1-4

The Character of ‘Majestic’

Of the twenty compositions in the key of A-flat major by Chopin, three works (15%) tend to be majestic or solemn. Most of the expression of ‘majestic’ is found in documents written in the later 1700s to 1800s. For example, in 1787, Kellner described A-flat major as ‘splendid majesty,’ and in 1807, Callcott expressed this key with the word ‘solemn.’66 Chopin’s A-flat major with a tender character has the following characteristics: 1) The pitch range of music is expanding. 2) The dynamics, densities, and dynamic contrasts are increasing. 4) The harmonic language of music is relatively simple.

66 Rita Steblin, A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries, 276. 43

Commonly, the majestic character is somewhat different from Chopin’s musical orientation generally perceived. However, Chopin is also a composer of majestic and solemn moods based on the A-flat major. Waltzes, Op.34 No.1 (1835), widely known as “Valse

Brillante,” is a representative example of such expressions, and this is the largest one in scale from his waltz list (total 299 measures long). This work is dedicated to Mille de Thun-

Hohenstein, daughter of a healthy and cultured family at Tetschen.67 Waltzes, Op.34 No.1 begins a fanfare-like motif with a character of majestic. The form of the piece is ternary, and each section consists of a four-measure phrase. (a four-measure unit is Chopin’s favorite.)

The beginning of this music provides a majestic atmosphere because of the strong contrast between musical density and texture. After the first two monophonic and powerful musical addresses, the fuller sound is implemented through chordal textures in mm.3-4.

Example 14: Waltzes Op.34 No.1 ‘Valse Brillante’ (1835) mm. 1-8

Earlier, there was a reference to the use of wide register, one of the majestic character features, and Waltzes, Op.34 No.1 is a representative example of that; one of the primary themes of the Waltz, from m. 74 is a clear example of the use of an expanded register. The right hand

67 Maurice J. E. Brown, Chopin An Index of His Works in Chronological Order, 98. 44

and left hand, which seem to be reminiscent of the wind instrument fanfare that appeared at the beginning of the work, maximize the majestic atmosphere due to the increase in its densities.

Example 15: Waltzes Op.34 No.1 ‘Valse Brillante’ (1835) mm. 74-78

The broadening of the register in majestic and solemn mood is pronounced in the low ranges, which is probably the most effective method. Perhaps, in Polonaise, Op.53, from mm.

17-20, the left-hand plays in three layers based on f. The lowest of these layers gives the sound a solemn character by continuously expanding the piece’s volume repeatedly, based on the dominant and tonic of the key of A-flat major.

Example 16: Polonaise Op.53 (1842) mm. 17-20

In Europe from the mid-sixteenth to the mid-eighteenth century, the 'Polish dance' was a common concept, and as a title, it is found only in non-Polish sources of this era. Polonaise was the most representative Polish dance song, which was more famous outside Poland than in 45

Poland. The earliest score can be found in 1544 in the lute tablature of Nuremberg, which identifies the form of polonaise's metric, melodic, and rhythmic types.68 The dance has long been recognized as "processional," and "stately character," The modern form of polonaise was solidified in the early eighteenth century, and usually with short and rhythmic motifs appearing in the first beat of triple time.69

Polonaise, Op.53, dedicated to Auguste Léo, patron of the arts, has an independent opus number and is generally dramatic and narrative.70 The form is a simple ternary with a dramatic introduction (mm.1-16) and has a majestic atmosphere for a coda (mm.171-181). Since Section

A (from m.17), the elegant and imposing theme has emerged in A-flat major, especially in

Section B (m.83), and the ostinato on the left-hand contributes significantly to the character of this work.

Another example of a majestic and solemn mood is Polonaise-Fantasie, Op.61 (1846).

The work is 288 measures; the piece is a considerably larger-scale work compared to the rest of

Chopin’s output. The frequent abrupt modulation throughout the piece sounds quite dramatic and narratively like a “musical manifesto.” In this piece, there is a great dynamic contrast in the design of the entire work. After the introduction, which suggests a little bit of the work’s primary theme, Section A, the first principal division appears from m. 22.

68 Adrian Thomas, “Beyond the dance,” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, edited by Jim Samson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 145.

69 Alison Latham, ed. “Polonaise.” The Oxford Companion to Music. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002).

70 Ibid., 151. 46

Example 17: Polonaise-Fantasie Op.61 (1846) mm. 22-27

Example 17 reveals the introduction of Section A (the first primary section) and continues until mm. 22-115. Unlike the tonally unstable introduction, A-flat major is maintained stably from here. The structural function of this part has a strong expository characteristic and is still narrative. On top of the polonaise rhythm played on the left hand, the four-measure phrases’ motif is accompanied by the melody of the vocal music.

47

The Key of C Major

The total number of documents for C Major in Steblin’s catalogue is 38. This number is relatively larger than the literature containing other keys, perhaps because it is the most basic of all tonal. The oldest literature is Méthode claire by Jean Rousseau in 1691, in which Rousseau described C major as ‘gay things and grandeur.’71 The impressions of C Major listed in Steblin’s catalogue can be roughly divided into five categories depending on the time. From 1691 to 1778, most of the impressions of this creation were ‘gay things’ or ‘militant,’ and in the late 1700s

(1779), ‘pure’ appeared in C major, making innocence ‘simplicity’ the most important emotion of that time. In the early 1800s, C major’s impressions moved to ‘grandioso’ and ‘majestic,’ and from 1817, the impressions of ‘militant’ and ‘gay’ appeared in the 1700s were often recalled, and since 1826, the impressions of ‘pure’ and ‘innocence’ reappeared.

Table 2

The Change of Key of C Major Impression72

Period Impressions Most frequent impressions

gay things, rude, rejoice,

most common of all, early and mid-1700s gay things, militant splendid, militant, somewhat

tender touching

71 Rita Steblin, A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries, 226.

72 Ibid., 226-230. 48

pure, not very strong and

marked, simplicity, a

later 1700s mixture of happy pure, innocence, simplicity

(cheerfulness, gentle,

seriousness) innocence

grandioso, noble and frank,

early 1800s majestic, naturalness, grandioso, military,

gravity, military majestic

war, mind free, gay,

1817-1824 brilliant, militant, splendid, militant

bold, virogous

lively, gratitude and

rejoicing, cheerful and pure, after 1826 pure, innocence strength, bold, heroic,

naivety, children’s talk

C major, along with E-flat major, ranks second in terms of total volume in Chopin’s, accounting for 11 (11.7%) of the 94 works surveyed. One peculiarity is that, except for Bolero

Op.19 (1833) and Rondo Op.73a, all of these keys appear in small-scale works, especially in

Mazurka. Chopin’s works in C major are as follows. Mazurkas Op.7 No.5, Op.24 No.2, Op.33

No.3, Op.56 No.2, Op.67 No.3, Op.68 No.1, Etudes Op.10 No.1, Op.10 No.7, Twenty-four

Preludes Op.28 No.1, Rondo Op.73a, and Bolero Op.19. 49

The following is a list of 11 works with C major as the primary key.

1) Character of militant or vigorous: Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.1, Mazurkas Op.56

No.2, Mazurkas Op.68 No.1 (totally 3)

2) Character of pure or simplicity: Mazurkas Op.24 No.2, Mazurkas Op.33 No.3, Mazurkas

Op.67 No.3, Mazurkas Op.7 No.5 (totally 4)

3) Character of rejoice or splendid (or grandiose): Etudes Op.10 No.7, Etudes Op.10 No.1,

Rondo Op.73a, Bolero Op.19 (totally 4)

Character of ‘Militant’ or ‘Vigorous’

Of Chopin’s 11 works in C major, three are gay things, or militant and vigorous, but this character is often mixed with other types of mood, such as pure or simple. Previously, 11 works in C major as the primary key are divided into three groups, but the first group: gay things emotion, the second group: pure character, and the third group: rejoice appear simultaneously in single work, to the extent their character boundaries are ambiguous. For example, Mazurkas,

Op.56 No.2 with a militant atmosphere and a simple tendency simultaneously; Mazurkas, Op.68

No.1 with a strong tendency and pure simultaneously, show that this tonality is not the key to maintaining only a single mood. However, in this study, the key affect is categorized with a larger emotional range as a representative appraisal standard.

Among Chopin’s works in C major, the following tendencies are characterized by the impression of militant and vigorous: 1) most of the works in C major as the primary key are

Mazurka, which increases the folk music tendency accompanying this tonality, 2) (and the Polish 50

Mazurka) cause frequent use of ostinato or drone-like rhythm, and 3) the melodic contour in the works tend to be simplified overall, and the average pitch range in the works tend to be lowered,

4) dynamics tend to increase or abrupt change.

His mazurka is a work that Chopin consistently composed throughout his life, and the number of pieces is approximately 60. Chopin’s music’s overall distinction can be divided into several categories, of which dance accounts for a large amount (such as mazurka, polonaise, and waltz, Etc.), with the highest proportion of Mazurka. Mazurka was made closer to the amateur player’s level in terms of performance difficulty than the similar dance works. For this reason,

Chopin’s mazurkas are often underrated musically.73

Mazurkas, Op.56 No.2 is one of the clear examples of a Polish style with a strong tendency. The tonic dominates this piece’s beginning with omitted thirds as a drone bass, which appears in a constant pattern on the low register of the piano. The right hand in m.5 also plays with legato of f, and the tendencies are quite a folklore. This piece sounds simply vigorous due to the speed, and the dynamics of the work, especially the accents on the left hand make a pleasant and healthy character.

Example 18: Mazurkas Op.56 No.2 (1843) mm. 1-6

73 Adrian Thomas, “Beyond the dance,” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, edited by Jim Samson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 154. 51

Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.1 is another example of C major featuring ostinato with constant rhythms. The work is structurally single-part form, and the brief single motive is initially presented constantly throughout the entire work. Kallberg calls that Chopin “a master of small forms” and argues that Chopin’s small-scale composition, especially Twenty-four

Preludes, is the essence of his music.74 This work is the most ‘monothematic’ work by Chopin and employs at least three different layers in texture persistently. Although the sound volume by dynamic is not so increased(mf), agitato and repeated motive make the work vigorously.

Another factor that makes this music a strong impression is the register of this piece; it continues to feel forceful by repeating the single rhythm in the comparably low and medium ranges in piano.

Example 19: Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.1 (1838-9) mm. 1-4

Chopin’s C major’s melodic contours tend to be generally simple because most of the C major is focused on strong folk colors mazurkas. If a C major-based work has a militant or vigorous impression, its dynamic is often dramatically increased or changed from the short unit

74 Jeffrey Kallberg. “Small 'forms': in defence of the prelude,” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, edited by Jim Samson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 124. 52

of music. Mazurkas, Op.68 No.1 is one of these works, with chordal passages accompanied by staccato. The sudden changing of dynamic from m.5 makes the vigorous mood.

Example 20: Mazurkas Op 68. No.1 (1829) mm. 3-6

Character of ‘Pure’ or ‘Simplicity’

On the other hand, C major works’ impression is either pure or simple. 4 of 11 works

(36%) are deeply related to the pure character. This pure or simple tendency is also believed to have originated from the characteristics of Polish mazurka. Usually, the musical characteristics in a single piece are mixed or transformed; it is very difficult to define in a word. For example, works that tend to be pure or simple are often vigorous also. Sometimes, the characteristics of pure and simple in musical works are similar to those of militancy. The following are the musical characteristics observed when Chopin’s C major has a pure impression. 1) there is a significant dynamic diminution in the works, 2) verbal words are included to provide an intimate impression. (e.g., rubato, sotto voce, semplice), 3) in some cases, with employing ostinato, folk musical materials are frequently observed.

Op.67 No.3 is somewhat difficult to call a traditional mazurka style, but rather a waltz style. The tonic in m.1, the secondary dominant seventh chord(V7/V) in m.2, the half-diminished 53

seventh chord is following in m.3, and the music returns to the tonic in m.4. In the first phrase cited in Example 21, almost the only representation of the mazurka’s traditional characteristic is considered the rhythm with ornamentation and articulation in m.4. However, considering the music itself, this piece is a pure expression of a simple style melody accompanied by rubato.

Example 21: Mazurkas Op.67 No.3 (1835) mm. 1-4

Another example of folklore mazurka in C major is Op.24 No.2. The drone bass appears at the beginning of the piece with the sotto voce, which offers a more folk music mood, while the primary melody in m.5 offers a very simple beauty.

Example 22: Mazurkas Op.24 No.2 (1833) mm. 1-6

Mazurkas, Op.33 No.3, employing the word semplice in itself, makes music simpler due to delicate dynamics and ostinato in the left hand. The simple ternary form sounds more 54

traditional mazurka than any other work; especially the consistent accents on the left hand emphasize the folk music mood.

Example 23: Mazurkas Op.33 No.3 (1837-8) mm. 1-4

Mazurkas, Op.7 No.5 in C major is another example in which the directive semplice appears on the score. This work features a repetitive G through four measures initially, and then the rhythmic melody with mezza voce nuance and the sensitive articulation appears on the left hand. A fanfare-like pedal point in the very beginning is one of the characteristics of Chopin’s mazurka. This pedal point is a drone, apparently due to its influence from the Polish folklore

Kujawiak.75 Kujawiak is one of Poland’s national dances, and Chopin combines Folkloristic effects of Polish with C major’s sensitivity sentiment in a very simple and intuitive manner.

Example 24: Mazurkas Op.7 No.5 (1830-32) mm. 3-6

75 Ibid., 154-155. 55

Character of ‘Rejoice’ or ‘Splendid (or Grandiose)’

4 of the 11 pieces with C major (36%) are classified as having rejoicing and splendid tendencies, such as Etudes Op.10 No.7, Etudes Op.10 No.1, Rondo Op.73a, and Bolero Op.19.

However, this study will omit the research of Rondo Op.73a and Bolero Op.19. Rondo Op.73a is composed for solo, but today, it is mostly played in two pianos (Op.73).76 Rondo Op.73a has an intimate character of the music, especially in the introduction that has an obvious cheerful mood.

In Bolero Op.19, despite C major tonality’s strong tendency during the introductory paths, the whole piece of no key signature has a wide variety of tonal changes that are either dominated by a minor or even partially difficult to find its tonal center, showing considerable “progressive.”

Even though Bolero Op.19 has this interesting tendency, however, the basis of the composition in this work is somewhat difficult to measure only with purely C major characters; this study will omit the mention of Op.19.

Etudes, Op.10 No.1 by Chopin features pedal tones of quasi-melodic bass in the left hand and persistent arpeggios in the right hand. This powerful, majestic impression supports a strong, bold, vigorous, even commanding C major composition character. The structure of

Etudes Op.1 No.1 is roughly A-B-A’, a typical through-composition.

76 According to the works list by Chopin in Grove Music Online, Op.73 is composed for two piano, and Op.73a for solo. However, the original work is for solo. Chopin composed both versions of this work in 1828. 56

Example 25: Etudes Op.10 No.1 (1830) mm. 1-3

Finlow recalls that 1800–1840 was the age of etude for piano and that many composers, including Cramer, Steibelt, and Field, were involved in the procession of the etude composition.

The parade of the etude products includes Chopin’s Op.10, Op.25, and 3 Nouvelles Etudes

(1839) as well. 12 Etudes, Op.10 was composed in 1833. Chopin’s and other composers’ significant difference is that Chopin’s etude is not intended solely for exercise, but rather for more emotive and expressing his inspiration.77 Etudes, Op. 10 No.7 is an intuitive work with a rejoice or splendid feeling. With a speed of vivace, the work is very cheerful, and delicate dynamic development does not limit only a didactical piece.

Example 26: Etudes Op.10 No.7 (1832) mm. 1-3

77 Simon Finlow, “The twenty-seven etudes and their antecedents,” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, edited by Jim Samson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 50. 57

The Key of C Minor and F Minor

In the history of key affection, C minor and F minor have long been the musicians’ favorite. At first glance, the two keys have been recognized as roughly similar because they both have ‘tragic’ characters in common. However, there are subtle differences between the documents of the two groups of keys. In this chapter, the study will combine these two keys into one chapter to discuss the commonalities and differences between C minor and F minor.

Steblin’s catalogue contains 32 documents for the C minor and 35 for the F minor. The first records of both C minor and F minor were equally found in Rousseau’s literature in 1691, and the impressions of both keys left by the documents are the same expression, ‘complaints and lamentations.’78 However, there is also a slight difference in applying the two key characteristics in the catalogue as time passes by.

In C minor’s case, the changes in this key in the reference of Steblin are roughly based on the following period: 1) the 1600s later, 2) the 1700s, 3) the early 1800s. C minor is the most basic key of tonal music, a parallel key of C major. C minor’s character has been recognized as a key of lament, pathetic, and tragic mood, combined with the gloomy impression provided by the manner of a flat key.

C minor and F minor are quite similar in that the character of the key is sorrowful.

However, there is a slight difference in each of the two groups of keys in Steblin’s reference. For example, in C minor, the nature of sadness expressed through this key is appropriate for expressing more personal or subjective grief. However, the key of F minor tends to perceive a

78 Rita Steblin, A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries, 230, 262. 58

more formal and melancholy mood. For example, in describing a tragic emotion, pathetic has a very personal aspect and is quite strong in terms of the intensity of the emotion. People in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, in particular, seemed to believe that C minor was more appropriate for personal sorrow than F minor.79 On the other hand, F minor was the key to funerals, and a burial is a social activity sociologically. The awareness that F minor is a more appropriate key for these emotional expressions is observed in the literature.80

The following is a table of changes in the C minor impression in Steblin’s catalogue.

Table 3

The Change of Key of C minor Impression81

Period Impressions Most frequent impressions

lamentation, gloomy, late 1600s plaintive plaintive

tender, pathetic, declaration pathetic, declaration of 1700s of love, a tragic key, pathetic love, a tragic key

gloomy, pathetic, extremely

lamenting, full of heartfelt, 1800s pathetic, painful love

79 Ibid., 230.

80 Ibid., 262.

81 Ibid., 230-234. 59

extreme misery, grandiose

grief, painful love,

The periodical changes of emotion in F minor are also identical to C minor in chronological terms, and this change in perception can be divided into three periods: 1) the

1600s, 2) the 1700s, 3) the early 1800s. F minor is a parallel key of F major, and F major has long been recognized as one of the most basic tonalities, which is the closely-related key of C major.

The following is a table of changes in the F minor impression in Steblin’s catalogue.

Table 4

The Change of Key of F minor Impression82

Period Impressions Most frequent impressions

late 1600s lamentation, gloomy, sad sad

melancholy, sad, funeral melancholy, 1700s melancholy, sorrow funeral melancholy

sad, religious,

lugubriousness, depression, sad, funeral lament, deep 1800s gloomy melancholy, funeral depression

82 Ibid., 262-266. 60

lament, deep depression,

gloomy, misery

‘Tragic’ is the most frequently featured keyword of C minor impressions in documents;

‘melancholy’ or ‘funereal’ is the most characteristics in F minor documents.

C Minor

C minor, along with F minor, is the second most popular key after C# minor throughout

Chopin’s minor works, accounting for 11 out of a total of 87 subjects (approximately 12.6%).

There are three types of characters in Chopin’s music: 1) pathetic, 2) grave, 3) gloomy.

The following is a classification of 11 C minor pieces by Chopin.

1) Character of pathetic: Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.20, Etudes Op.25 No.12, Etudes

Op.10 No.12, Polonaises Op.40 No.2, Nocturnes Op.48 No.1 (5 pieces total)

2) Character of the grave: Op.72 No.2 ‘Funeral March’ (1 piece)

3) Character of gloomy: Mazurkas Op.56 No.3, Mazurkas Op.30 No.1, Sonata Op.4

movement I, Sonata Op.4 movement IV, Rondo Op.1 (5 pieces total)

The Character of ‘Pathetic’

Of the eleven C minor as a primary key in Chopin’s works, 5 of them can be classified as pathetic characters (45.5%). This tendency of tragedy is the most important factor to 61

distinguish C minor from F minor. As mentioned earlier, C minor’s sorrow mood is focused on more personal, deeper tragic sentiments, while F minor is an emotion expressing sadness that is more social and accompanied by public meaning, such as funerals and memorials.

The following is a characteristic of C minor’s work, which has a pathetic disposition: 1) dramatic and energetic, 2) expansion of register and increase of speed, 3) a strong narrative tendency.

Most of Chopin’s C minors with the pathetic had much tragic emotion flowing like the

“energy of sad feeling.” In that sense, the pathetic is narrative, dramatic, and energetic. These tendencies of character are not a matter of the size of the work. Chopin’s Twenty-four Preludes

Op.28 No.20, a miniature piece, creates energetic, dramatic, and narrative music similar to a simple funerary march. The range of pitches in this work is the mid-and-low register, the dramatic character expressed by strongly highlighted ff in dynamic.

Example 27: Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.20 (1838-9) mm. 1-4

The implementation of the pathetic character is also expressed through the extended range of pitches. Chopin’s Etudes, Op.25 No.12 is a good example of the dramatic mood that can be maximized if music with this sentiment using in an expanded range. In Example 28, the time signature of alla breve with molto con fuoco emphasized by fast-moving passage and accents 62

across five or six registers, maximizing the piece’s tension. Chopin’s works include Op.10 No.12 in C minor, which has similar characters.

Example 28: Etudes Op.25 No.12 (1836) mm. 1-3

Polonaises, Op.40 No.2 is music by dense chordal passages in right-hand while the left- hand plays with sotto voce intonation, but the music of passionate energy. This work is another example of a pathetic tendency in that the increase in energy combines with mid-and-low registers to provide a pathetic mood.

Example 29: Polonaises Op.40 No.2 (1839) mm. 3-6

Nocturnes, Op.48 No.1 differs significantly in terms of dynamic and tempo, unlike the typical tragic mood of works. The melodic contour in the right-hand maintains a sing-able vocal style, and the accompanying in the left-hand is the expandable version of the funerary marches. 63

Dynamics and energies are relatively decreased, and the musical expression remains very delicate, especially due to the octave unison’s unique sound in the second and fourth beat m.1.

The vertical octave makes a gloomy and melancholy mood while still having a dramatic effect.

In the alternating section (section B), the key moves to C major, the parallel key, and the music’s densities and dynamics also increase and change into a dramatic atmosphere. This work’s narrative tendency is very natural considering that nocturne is influenced by the narrative literature of Romance in the nineteenth century.83

Example 30: Nocturnes Op.48 No.1 (1841) mm. 1-4

The Character of ‘Grave’

Of the eleven C minor works by Chopin, there is only one piece in the classification of grave emotion, but this work can be understood as an emotional extension, either tragic or pathetic. If there is a difference from the preceding emotions, the work with the solemn mood is relatively few dramatic and less energetic; this character expresses the psychological state of

83 David Rowland, “The Nocturne Development of a New Style,” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, edited by Jim Samson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 36. 64

‘scene’ and ‘situation’ rather than narrative aspects. As mentioned earlier, Chopin’s artistic interest in grave emotion has already been very high, and many works corresponding to this sentiment are existed, with two funeral marches, the third movement from Sonata, Op.35 and a miscellaneous piece Op.72 No.2 ‘Funeral March.’

Example 31: Op.72 No.2 ‘Funeral March’ (1841) mm. 1-6

The Character of ‘Gloomy’

The number of Chopin’s gloomy in C minor is 5 (45.5%), which is the same number of the pathetic. Although Chopin’s gloomy mood is a typical character that frequently appears in his output even in major, it corresponds to Chopin’s basic emotions; it may not be necessary to give special meaning to his music. Gloomy mood, especially in C minor, is often very similar to the music from the F minor’s, but C minor provides deeper sorrow. In this research, the study will focus on the two gloomy mazurkas by Chopin.

The first example of gloomy sensibility having a C minor is Mazurkas, Op.56 No.3, in which the stepwise-tendered right-hand melody and quasi-stepwise left-hand meet simultaneously to embody a kind of contrapuntal manner of eighteenth-century music. A 65

suspended G of the inner-voice serves as harmonic support. The stepwise-tendered melody becomes the primary theme; the emotion of the piece is quite intimate.

Example 32: Mazurkas Op.56 No.3 (1841) mm. 1-5

On the other hand, Mazurkas, Op.30 No.1 is more a ‘Polish mazurka’ than previously mentioned mazurkas in this chapter. This work, which evokes a melancholy feeling based on the minor key, is full of typical characteristics that Chopin shows in his other mazurkas. For example, in terms of the tempo (allegretto), the left-hand emphasizes the second beat, and a constant bass of particular notes appears on the left-hand. This work is closer to the essential character of the mazurkas by him.

Example 33: Mazurkas Op.30 No.1 (1837) mm. 1-4

66

F Minor

Meanwhile, as previously mentioned, the most frequent keyword in F minor documents is melancholy and funereal, which is distinct from the tragic sentiment of C minor in documents.

The F minor, along with C minor, is the second popular key after C# minor in the entire minor works by Chopin, accounting for 11 out of 87 works (approximately 12.6%). This volume happens to be the same in terms of quantity as the C minor. Chopin’s character in F minor is roughly divided into three categories: 1) a character of gloomy, 2) a character of sorrow, and 3) a character of misery.

The following is a classification of 11 F minor characteristics by Chopin.

1) Character of gloomy: Mazurkas Op.7 No.3, Ballade Op.52, Etudes Op.10 No.9, Mazurkas

Op.63 No.2, Etudes Op. 25 No.2, Fantasie Op 49 (6 pieces total)

2) Character of sorrow: Nocturnes Op.55 No.1, Mazurkas Op.68 No.4, Waltzes Op.70 No.2,

Polonaises Op.71 No.3 (4 pieces total)

3) Character of misery: Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.18 (1 piece)

The Character of ‘Gloomy’

Of the eleven F minor works by Chopin, 6 can be classified as a gloomy character

(54.5%). One interesting about Chopin’s gloomy is that this emotion appears in combination with many different moods roughly. In other words, a gloomy emotion tends to act as a kind of

‘path’ or ‘hub’ that makes it easier to combine with other emotions, such as gloomy combines 67

with melancholy, and gloomy combines with majestic feelings. This is evidence that gloomy character can be thought of as Chopin’s ‘emotional root.’ As mentioned earlier, F minor’s gloomy character expresses sadness, such as funereal and memorial, which is different from C minor’s sorrow.

Most of Chopin’s F minor works with gloomy emotions are not emphasize this key’s character in special technical attempts, such as musical construction or the dynamic tendency of music. Instead, it is observed that music is focused on the pure emotion or sound quality that melody or harmony themselves provide. Therefore, to understand the F minor’s negative emotions, it is necessary to examine what other emotions appear in conjunction with. The following are F minor’s gloomy characteristics: 1) a gloomy emotion accompanied by melancholy mood, 2) a gloomy emotion accompanied by sorrow feeling, 3) a gloomy emotion accompanied by majestic impression.

According to the New Oxford American Dictionary, melancholy as an adjective is “a feeling of pensive sadness, typically with no obvious cause,” and as a noun, a state of

“desolation.” The dictionary explains that the state of being ‘pensive,’ in other words, ‘involved,’ is a very personal feeling. Among Chopin’s F minor works, the screening criteria for gloomy with melancholy emotions are as follows. First, the work that makes a “lonely” mood, but not overly “sad” for the second, is classified to melancholy sense.

However, the question that this must accompany, then, needed proof of what point of

Chopin’s work is melancholy and what certain patterns or formulas existed in the musical piece.

One peculiarity that can be a factor for the melancholy gloomy atmosphere is the sound of a

‘sense of emptiness.’ The following Example 34 is the introduction of Mazurkas, Op.7 No.3.

This passage, which appears in the piano’s low range, is the tonic of F minor, where the third is 68

intentionally omitted, the changing-tone in the right-hand centered on the fifth of the tonic, and the E, the non-chord escape-tone, is running between the root and fifth. This sense of emptiness passage in eight measures creates a very special feeling in this music.

Example 34: Mazurkas Op.7 No.3 (1830-31) mm. 1-8

Another example of causing a sense of emptiness by omitting a particular member from a chord is also shown in Etudes, Op.10 No.9. The left-hand’s “stretched-out” accompaniment based on F minor tonic follows the right-hand, which is a primary melody with eighth note rests.

At this time, a careful chasing of the left-hand is carried out with sixth or third intervals approximately but often produces a deliberate hollow sound by presenting a perfect octave. In

Example 35, in m.1, the right-hand and left-hand encounter with sixth intervals. Soon, beats in the second, fourth, and fifth (in m.2); beats in the first, fourth, and fifth (in m.3) provide a sense of emptiness.

Example 35: Etudes Op.10 No.9 (1829) mm. 1-4 69

Methods that evoke unique gloomy and melancholy emotions by providing perfect intervals make a ‘hollow sound.’ Moreover, the vertical chord can also occur in a melancholy mood in close encounters with dense chords. Ballade Op.52 in Example 36 shows the first alternative section following the introduction. An F in the last beat of the right-hand (in m.8) makes a ‘sound gap’ with an octave apart F in the left-hand. Again, in m.9, a sense of emptiness appears between E and F in the first beat. (If both hands are played in an octave closer, the sound would have strengthened the “collision” rather than emptiness.) Furthermore, this melody and harmony appear twice; this particular acoustic content is being strengthened again. The feeling of emptiness due to this unique acoustic design is also employed in the Nocturnes Op.48 No.1 (in

Example 30).

Example 36: Ballade Op.52 (1842-3) mm. 8-12

The unique acoustic nuances provided by an octave can also occur in music where the rhythm of both hands is different. The beginning of Etudes, Op.25 No.2 in Example 37 shows completely different rhythms between two hands, but perfect octave intervals supply a unique melancholy feeling of the piece.

70

Example 37: Etudes Op. 25 No.2 (1836) mm. 1-4

Such methods of evoking special emotions by adjusting a vertical register, or omitting a particular note from the chord, appear again at the beginning of Mazurkas, Op.63 No.2. The left- hand’s chord for the primary melody in m.1 is the diminished-seventh of F minor, where the third is omitted. This omission technique occurs even at the second beat in m. 3, where the fifth of the dominant-seventh is omitted. In general, Chopin’s works suggest that the most advantageous technique for conveying melancholy and gloomy emotions is providing acoustic emptiness to the vertical chords.

3x 5x

Example 38: Mazurkas Op.63 No.2 (1846) mm. 1-4 71

Meanwhile, the emotions of gloomy can also be expressed through rhythm style and tempo. Fantasie, Op 49 in Example 39 is a typical funerary march, and at the beginning of the piece, both hands play an octave unison in the absence of any chordal support at the low register, and then lead to a sudden change of chordal texture, delivering both gloomy and majestic impression.

Example 39: Fantasie Op.49 (1841) mm. 1-4

Fantasie, Op.49 by Chopin is an extended form of his music. This piece is a representative work with the mood of grave provided by F minor and is instructed to tempo di

Marcia from the beginning deliberates the reminiscent of the solemn. Although Fantasie, Op.49 is a large-scale piece, there is no introduction and has a clear F minor in tonal; the primary theme is restated when the first four-measures unit ends in an authentic cadence of F minor (in m.5), the next phrases modulated to the key of A-flat major. Many sections of this work are presented in

A-flat major, which is also deeply related to A-flat major’s tender and majestic impressions.

Fantasie, Op.49 has a fairly narrative speaking overall. Unusually, the cadence at the very end ends with a plagal cadence, which is a religious manner of music, commonly associated with this work’s overall intention of funereal ceremony.

72

The Character of ‘Sorrow’

The next work, Nocturnes, Op.55 No.1 is a gloomy piece in many ways and has F minor’s characteristics that supply a melancholy mood. For example, the second beats in m.1 and m.3, the vertical F with an octave unison in both hands, causes a sense of emptiness. However, this work is not distinguished from melancholy emotion because there is no intentional space in the acoustic construction.

Example 40: Nocturnes Op.55 No.1 (1842-4) mm. 1-4

Meanwhile, Chopin’s F minor’s harmonic tendency is that many stepwise motions occur in the bass. The bass line of Nocturnes, Op.55 No.1 features stepwise motion on the diatonic scale of F minor, while the bass line of Mazurkas, Op.68 No.4 employs chromatic stepwise.

Besides, a similar stepwise motion appears in Waltzes, Op.70 No.2 (in Example 42) and measures from 5 in Polonaises, Op.71 No.3 (in Example 43). These are examples of the possibility that the music generated by stepwise motion could provide some sorrowful emotional suggestion to the listener, especially when combined with minor mode. The constant emotional experience by stepwise motion is common in popular and fusion music by Yuhki Kuramoto

(1951-) and André Gagnon (1936-2020). 73

Example 41: Mazurkas Op.68 No.4 (?1846) mm. 1-4

Example 42: Waltzes Op.70 No.2 (1842) mm. 1-4

Example 43: Polonaises Op.71 No.3 (1828) mm. 1-4

74

The Character of ‘Misery’

Twenty-four Prelude Op.28 No.18 is quite unusual music among Chopin’s F minor.

With 21 measures of molto allegro, the work expresses an energetic and unstable emotion, and makes the tragic or pathetic energy that could be observed in C minor. The reason for classifying this work’s tendency as misery is the sentiment and ‘irony’ of such a dynamic tragedy and Leikin described this miniature piece as “the recitative outbursts in the Prelude may indeed appear unhinged, even ugly.”84

Example 44: Twenty-four Preludes Op.28 No.18 (1838-9) mm. 1-4

84 Anatole, Leikin, The Mystery of Chopin’s Préludes (Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2015), 125. 75

CHAPTER IV.

COMPUTATIONAL ANALYSIS OF CHOPIN

Introduction

According to the theory of affects, which had a large impact on the way that composers thought about their musical materials in the eighteenth century, every key had its own expressive potential. Rita Steblin’s influential thesis on the topic (1983) documents many examples of competing theories of the expression of different keys. For example, the key of D major was supposed to express mirth and rejoicing and grandeur and magnificence by Jean-Philippe

Rameau (1722), lively feelings by George Joseph Vogler (1778), and the most cheerful and gay key by Francesco Galeazzi (1796). The key of G minor was claimed to be the most beautiful key by Johann Matteson (1713), but by contrast was claimed to express discontent, uneasiness, worry, or a failed scheme by C.F.D. Schubart (1784), and the most pathetic after F minor by

André-Ernest-Modeste Grétry (1797).

As mentioned above, there was not one single theory of affects, but different writers highlighted different modes of expression for the same keys. It is therefore an open question whether a composer who believed that certain keys had expressive tendencies would align their compositional choices with one theory of affects over another. It is certainly possible that a composer might have even had his or her own conception of what a particular key tended to express emotionally. 76

As Steblin demonstrates, historical musicology has traditionally been the primary vehicle of exploring the theory of affects, including both general conceptions of theoretical writers regarding the expressive tendencies of particular keys, and potential consistent relationships between a composer’s conceptions of key expression and their musical output. Specifically, the primary means of determining how a writer or composer thought of the expressive potential of a key has been letters, writings, source examination, and other methods traditionally employed by historical musicologists.

However, not all composers wrote clearly about their thoughts concerning any theory of affects they may have entertained. Even if some writings exist that may hint at how they thought of particular keys, not all composers were as thorough as C.F.D. Schubart (1784), who methodically outlined typical expressive characteristics of each major and minor key.

An alternative method for examining a composer’s thoughts about how particular keys should be expressed would be to go directly to the musical output. Rather than relying on spotty writings or personal reflections, which may or may not be completely honest, a composer’s oeuvre may leave direct clues about how that composer thought of the affective potential of particular keys.

Previous work has used computational methods to unearth subtle musical cues that might reveal important elements of music difficult for casual observation to discover. For example,

Cumming and McKay (2021) automatically extracted over 800 musical features from 82 works in MS Florence, an early manuscript containing four genres of Italian-texted polyphonic. They showed that the Italian Madrigal was not derived from the frottola, as had been previously thought, given the lack of similar musical characteristics between the two genres. 77

By using automatic feature extraction, many subtle characteristics of different key treatments can be pulled directly out of the musical surface. For example, jSymbolic (McKay, et al. 2018) can automatically determine for a given work the range from highest to lowest pitches, the relative importance of various registers, the diversity of unique chord types, including incomplete harmonies, how relatively strong or weak tonal centers, the mean and median pitch height, the level of chromaticism, the prevalence of each type of vertical interval, textural density, rhythmic activity, average chord durations, note density per quarter note, etc. Once these features are extracted, it is possible to look for subtle differences between the treatments of each individual key. Moreover, it is also possible to look for differences in groups of keys, such as major-mode sharp keys vs. major-mode flat keys as a group.

One composer particularly promising to investigate in this way would be Frédéric

Chopin. Although he wrote a few works for other instruments, most of his musical output was written for the single instrument of the piano. One confounding complication of looking at music written for many disparate sound sources could be the affordances of those particular instruments. For example, a piece of music in E-flat major written for string quartet involves very few open strings as compared to a piece in E major. Therefore, if comparing piano music to string quartets, it might be difficult to disentangle the role that the key selection plays from the role that instrument affordance plays in compositional choices.

Another benefit of examining Chopin’s output is that he was composing in the mid- nineteenth century. Earlier composers of the eighteenth centuries tended to compose for keys closer to the top of the circle of fifths. Even though equal temperament was beginning to become the standard for tuning in the first few decades of the nineteenth century, the theory of affects was still a strong influence over musical thought despite the tendency of equal temperament to 78

functionally eliminate any tuning and color differences between individual keys. By Chopin’s birth in 1810 there were still many competing tuning systems in use even for pianos. In 1811, for example, James Broadwood introduced his equally tempered piano in New Monthly Magazine, arguing that his manufacturing process could better represent the harmony of great composers his time, there was a lot more freedom for composers to modulate their works to a wider variety of keys. Earlier, the standard key relationships of modulating to the dominant or the relative major constrained many composer’s key choices after the initial key was chosen. However, by

Chopin’s era, composers were freer to modulate to many distantly-related keys in ways that were consistent with their expressive objectives.

A final benefit of examining Chopin’s musical output is that all of his early editions have recently been digitized by the Naradowy Instytut Fryderyka Chopina (NIFC), translated as “The

National Institute for Fryderyk Chopin.” This digitization provides a convenient source for examining systematic musical choices reflect his key usage.

A complicating issue about associating an entire work’s musical characteristics with that work’s key is that very few pieces stay in the governing key for the duration of the piece. It is very common for the home key to be dislodged, sometimes fairly early in the work. Certain keys are more common than others, such as modulating to the dominant or relative major, and as mentioned above, Chopin commonly used more adventurous modulations as well. For example, chromatic mediant key relationships are an important modulatory move for Chopin.

One option would be to correlate surface level musical features for each individual key area. However, this approach quickly runs against some significant methodological problems. It is not always clear when or where in the music a modulation has happened. Different analysts can often disagree about the depth to which an analysis should occur, and whether a hint of 79

another key area might be considered a surface tonicization or a full modulation. Even if a depth- level for analysis could somehow be operationalized, it is still not always clear what is the governing key of any particular section. In some cases, works are composed in strongly sectional ways, such that key areas are separated strongly by double barlines and are harmonically closed, clearly beginning and ending in the same key. However, in the case of pivot chord modulations, which are one of the most common types of modulations, the movement from one key area to another is seamless. This also minimizes the difference of musical character between the different key areas.

An alternative method would be to assign one governing key to the entire work. This approach also has some methodological issues. For example, in the case of the strongly sectional forms mentioned above, it is very common for a strong change of musical character between formal sections, suggesting that the change of key might play a role in musical feature choice. By ignoring these transitions, it is possible that there may be conflation between the expressive tendencies of different key areas that would otherwise be clear. Even in the case of modulations that are less aligned with clear formal boundaries, it is common for themes to demonstrate different characteristics in different keys. This is commonly seen in sonata forms, for example, in which the theme associated with the secondary key area is often more lyrical, quieter, and more stepwise in nature than the theme associated with the primary key.

Nevertheless, we chose to treat each work as if it had one governing key. This method does lack sensitivity to associating different keys with different musical characteristics in a piece that modulates. However, even in the case of Chopin, in which there is a wider variety of keys that can be chosen as subsidiary keys, there are still very common patterns of keys modulated to.

Modulating to the dominant (or subdominant in a trio) is nevertheless one of the most common 80

choices, even in Chopin’s music. Modulating to chromatic mediants is also a common pattern in this music. Furthermore, by the mid-nineteenth century, it is common to treat parallel keys in similar ways and to fluidly move between parallel key relationships. Moreover, in the case of works with pivot chord modulations, the character of different key areas is much more blended.

One can imagine that the key choices that Chopin may use for subsidiary keys may reflect the expressive intentions he had when choosing the home key of the entire work. Nevertheless, we recognize that there are limitations to choosing one key for an entire work.

Sampling Methodology

For a composer like Chopin, it is not entirely clear which of his solo piano works should be included in a study like this. One option would be to simply include all works for which there are Opus numbers. This approach was taken in Appendix 1. However, there are a number of works included in the official Opus numbers that Chopin did not publish in his lifetime.

Alternatively, one might sample just works published during Chopin’s life. However, there are some significant late-opus pieces that would be excluded from that approach. There are also published works either during Chopin’s life or shortly afterwards that do not have an official

Opus number, and several works for which there is disagreement about what the proper Opus number should be, as in the Op. 72 works.

For this study, we took as a convenience sample every Chopin work listed at the website for The National Institute for Fryderyk Chopin. The NIFC is a project of the Polish government 81

to collect all editions of Chopin’s music that were published during his lifetime. In Chopin’s case, many of his published works were only published after his death, so the data is supplemented by five posthumous works missing Opus numbers deemed important by the NIFC to fill out the catalogue of works: Mazurka in A minor, Polonaise in G minor, Polonaise in G- sharp minor, Variations sur un Air national allemand pour le Pianoforte, and the Waltz in E minor. There are also two works missing from the database: the two Polonaises Op. 71, No. 2 and No. 3. The database files document all of Chopin’s original first editions, published in different countries, most notably by several different publishers in each of France, Germany, and

England. This database meticulously documents all differences between early published editions and notes inaccuracies and typographical errors in the original publications.

From this corpus, we selected only the earliest editions listed on the website (with one exception, see below). In other words, in whichever country the first publication appeared, that was the edition that we sampled. However, we applied all of the score corrections noted in the

NIFC’s database to minimize the negative impact of typographical errors on the quality of the data. We then filtered out all works not written for solo piano, including works written for piano and one string instrument such as Op.8 that we eliminated.

Key identifications for each work were taken from the Grove Online database. In some instances, there were some conflicts regarding Opus number designations or conflicts within an

Opus between the Grove database and the NIFC’s database. For example, the earliest publication of the Op.41 Mazurkas in Leipzig are in a different order (C# minor, E minor, B major, and A- flat major) than the Grove Database. We therefore opted to include the later published Paris edition that appears in the order most common today: E minor, B major, A-flat major, and C# minor. Additionally, there is some disagreement about what counts as the posthumously 82

published Op. 72 works. The NIFC database lists five separate works, the Nocturne in E minor, the Funeral Marche in C minor, and the three Ecossaises in D major, G major, and D-flat major.

A further complication arises from several of Chopin’s works being commonly considered “progressive,” in which they start and end in different keys. There are at least three ways of considering how Chopin conceptualized these progressive works. One possibility is that

Chopin considered these progressive works to really be only “in” one key, either the starting key or the ending key. Alternatively, it is possible that Chopin thought of both the beginning and ending keys as governing the musical rhetoric equally. It is also possible that Chopin thought of these works almost like two separate movements, each of which is governed by its own key. For the purpose of our study, in which specific musical characteristics are associated with specific governing keys, it was important to associate each work with only one key. However, we decided that there was no practical way of determining which of these possibilities for the way

Chopin conceptualized governing keys is most accurate, at least before conducting our study, and so we decided to eliminate these “progressive” pieces from further consideration.

Specifically, when the Grove online database listed two different primary keys for the work, different keys for beginning and ending, we removed that work from our study, with one exception (see below). This applies to the Op.19 Bolero (beginning in C major and ending in A major), the Op.31 Scherzo (which begins in B-flat minor and ends in D-flat major), the Op.38

Ballade (which begins in F major and ends in A minor), and the Op.49 Fantasie (beginning in F minor and ending in A-flat major).

There are some additional works composed in traditional composite forms that exhibit two different key areas that are clearly identifiable and in which each formal section is harmonically closed. For example, Sonata Op.4 movement II, the Grande Sonate, is a Menuetto 83

and Trio, in which the Menuetto is in E-flat major and the Trio is in E-flat minor. Given the parallel key relationship, we considered the entire movement to be in E-flat major. Other works/movements with closely related Trio sections include the second movement of Chopin’s

Op.8 (Scherzo in G major and Trio in C major) and the two posthumously published Polonaises: the Polonaise in G minor (published in Warsaw by Cybulski) has a trio in B-flat major with no da Capo, and the Polonaise in g# minor (published in Warsaw by Kaufmann) has a trio in B major. Finally, we elected to include the Rondo Op.16, which begins with a long off-tonic introduction. The introduction begins in C minor but is harmonically unstable and treats the key of C-flat major as an augmented sixth to set up a prolonged dominant B-flat major as a way of preparing the primary key of E-flat major at the Rondo. We considered this work to be in E-flat major.

A special problem exists in the case of Op.22. The central portion of the piece was a

278-measure Allegro written in E-flat major earlier in Chopin’s career, but then he later added a long 114-measure introduction in G major. Given the relative stability of each section, and the historical distance between the composition of these two sections, we opted to include them as separate compositions in separate keys. After our filtering process, we ended up with 181 distinct works, movements, or portions of works.

Computational Methodology

In our analysis, we downloaded the entire Chopin Institute’s database. These files were encoded in Humdrum kern format (Huron 1994, “Unix Tools for Music Research: The 84

Humdrum Toolkit Reference Manual”). Kern is a symbolic data representation that encodes in a text-based format most of the structurally important notations included on a graphical score.

Primarily, this refers to pitches, durations, and barlines, but many encodings also include articulations, phrase markings, beaming information, written out dynamic markings, expression markings, Etc.

In order to convert this data into a format that would assist with automatic feature extraction, we first needed to convert the kern data into midi format. For this, we used Sapp’s

(http://extras.humdrum.org/man/hum2mid/) hum2mid program. We then uploaded the midi files into jSymbolic (McKay, et al. 2018). As a data mining tool, jSymbolic is able to extract 1,497 musical features from symbolic music data. However, many of these features were not relevant for our study. For example, instrumentation was not relevant because we only sampled piano pieces.

Another significant issue is the influence that a piece’s key has on pitch-class content.

There is a large literature examining the nature of pitch hierarchy within the context of tonal keys.85

Regardless of key, for example, the most common scale degree for any given work in a major key is usually the dominant, followed by the tonic, and then the mediant. Minor mode works show a different pattern, but also demonstrate strong tonal relationships regardless of which pitch is tonic. Recall that the purpose of our study was to look for musical characteristics

85 Carol L. Krumhansl, and Edward J. Kessler, “Tracing the dynamic changes in perceived tonal organization in a spatial representation of musical keys,” Psychological Review 89, no. 4 (July 1982): 334-368.

Carol L. Krumhansl, The cognitive foundations of musical pitch, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 307

Joshua Albrecht and Daniel Shanahan, “The Use of Large Corpora to Train a New Type of Key-Finding Algorithm: An Improved Treatment of the Minor Mode,” Music Perception 31, no. 1 (September 2013), 59-67.

85

that might adhere to individual keys that will consistently reflect particular affects. Regardless of the composer or era, or which theory of affects (if any) a composer had internalized, it is a safe assumption that any tonal composer’s music will demonstrate patterns of pitch-class usage by key. This is owing not to any musical character of that key, but rather as a side effect of simply composing in that key. Hierarchically important pitches will almost certainly be over- represented. Therefore, for the purpose of this study, in which we are looking for a key’s affective qualities to influence a composer’s use of low-level musical characteristics, it would be misleading to examine pitch content, which would identify differences in keys whether or not the composer was influenced by a theory of affects. Therefore, we eliminated pitch features that would conform to a key’s pitch hierarchy, such as a histogram of pitch and pitch-class prevalence, the first and last pitch, and most and second-most-used pitches and pitch-classes, from our computational analysis. Other pitch-based features that are not strictly reflective of key property alone, however, were kept. This includes the number of discrete pitches and pitch- classes, the relative importance of bass/middle/high registers, prevalence of chromatic half-step motion, mean pitch height, and the prevalence of various melodic and vertical intervals

(excluding M/m 3rds and 6ths, which are strongly reflective of mode).

After filtering out instrumentation and pitch distribution information as well, we also filtered out other miscellaneous features that did not seem relevant to our study, such as glissando prevalence and vibrato prevalence, for example. Once this was done, we ultimately extracted 685 musical features from the Chopin files relevant for our study.

With such a large feature set, traditional analysis methods like regression or principal components analysis are difficult to implement. Another approach is to use machine learning to identify patterns between the large feature set and particular keys. Machine learning 86

systematically correlates massive data to look for patterns. However, this approach is susceptible to overfitting. Simply put, any time enough data is correlated with other data, there will be strong correlations that emerge simply as a result of random chance and that may not actually reflect genuine patterns that generalize beyond the dataset. One way to minimize this effect is to engage in what is called “supervised learning.” Because our database includes a “ground truth” of key identifications provided by alternative publishers and/or editors, it is possible to mitigate overfitting by correcting the machine learning algorithm with external key information.

Nevertheless, statistical overfitting is still possible, especially with as many as 685 musical features. Overfitting can be further reduced by using a method called “cross-validation.”

In this approach, the algorithm is trained to look for correlations only within a randomly-selected

(say) 95% of the database. The final 5% is withheld from analysis until the machine learning algorithm finds correlations it deems strong enough to be relevant. Then, the 5% of the database that had originally been withheld is examined to see if those correlations continue to apply. In short, the training portion of the cross-validation process builds hypotheses that then get tested in the final portion of the process. This can be done any number of times. In a twenty-fold cross validation, each work of Chopin is included in the training portion 19 times and in the testing portion 1 time.

In this study, we employed a twenty-folds cross-validation machine learning algorithm to both examine a large feature set to find relationships between keys and musical structures, and then to also test these relationships for generalizability and therefore to minimize the chance that the relationships found are misleading and spurious, or only as a result of chance rather than a real effect Chopin had intentionally composed. 87

The jSymbolic extracted features were fed into the Weka data mining platform (Witten et al., 2016). These features went through three layers of investigation. In the first pass, we simply checked which of the individual musical features demonstrated the strongest correlation by key or class. This approach takes each correlation one by one and finds the feature that maximally separates each piece by key or class. However, some musical features may co-vary with one another or account for similar types of differences between keys/classes. The second pass compensates for this issue by looking at all 685 musical features simultaneously with machine learning to determine which account for the greatest variability between the keys/classes we were considering. Finally, we used the support vector machine (SVM) algorithm to train the classifiers, because this algorithm has been shown to be robust even for relatively small datasets like the 180 works/movements of Chopin’s piano output. Using twenty-folds cross validation, we build models for keys or classes on 95% of the dataset and then attempt to classify the remaining 5% of works based on those models. The data is rotated through 20 times, with each piece being in the training set 19 times and the test set once. Final accuracy rates and a confusion matrix that shows how works are being mislabeled follows, suggesting how musically pertinent and generalizable the musical feature models are.

Results

The most common way to characterize the role of affect in composition is to think of particular keys, like A-flat major, as reflective of particular affects, expressions, or emotions.

However, to see statistically significant patterns in a dataset, it is necessary to have enough data 88

to be able to generalize patterns. For keys like A-flat major or C minor, Chopin has composed enough movements/works in those keys to see particular patterns. However, some keys are rarely used, such as D minor (only used twice), G# minor (only used three times), D major (used three times), and A major (used three times). Other keys, such as D# minor, A-flat minor, or C-flat major never appear at all, though their enharmonic equivalents of E-flat minor, G# minor, and B major are used. It is difficult or impossible to generalize key usage with keys used only twice or three times, and it is likely impossible to know how Chopin would have composed in keys that he never composed in.

An alternative approach would look at combinations of keys. In other words, distinct keys that share mode and similar positions on the circle of fifths tend to have different varieties of similar basic expressions. For example, C minor and F minor are both described by Steblin

(p.230, p.262) as expressing a lamentation mood but in different varieties. F minor is a more pure sad kind of lamentation mood, whereas C minor is said to express a more energetic pathetique feeling. Even G minor, though missing the lament aspect, is still said to express a sweet and tender sadness and complexity, and B-flat minor is said to express a mournful pain, or a discontent and grumbling. Though these are distinguishable affects, it may still be possible to look for patterns of expressed affect in these closely-related keys.

Therefore, we have broken down the analysis into successive layers of specificity as well. In the first case, we simply compare major mode to minor mode musical expression, regardless of the number of sharps or flats in the key. The second layer of analysis involves sorting keys into three categories based only on which accidentals appear in their key signatures, including sharp keys, flat keys, or none (C major and A minor). The third level of analysis combines mode and accidentals in the key signature to produce 6 categories: sharp major, sharp 89

minor, flat major, flat minor, and C major and A minor. Finally, we examined the role of musical characteristics of specific keys in the spirit of the theory of affects. Although some keys are under-represented, and any conclusions from these examinations must remain tentative, it was nevertheless deemed important to try to replicate the theory of affects by examining specific keys. This resulted in twenty-five different key categories (discussed in detail in Appendix 1).

Mode

The simplest comparison is to examine whether Chopin treated major and minor modes as categories differently. This dataset consists of 93 major mode works and 87 minor mode works. We can begin our investigation by examining the musical features that account for the greatest variability of treatment between modes. The strongest correlation by mode is the proportion of melodic intervals that correspond to a semitone, as shown in Figure 1. As Figure 1 shows, the minor mode uses significantly more melodic semitone motion on average (m = 15%) than the major mode (m = 11%), p <.00001. This is a musically relevant characteristic, as the half-step motion is often tied to the sigh motive in musicological writings, a musical gesture that is said to emphasize musical sadness, loss, and grief. The significantly greater percentage of melodic half-step motion in the minor mode is consistent with Chopin emphasizing the sad characteristics of that mode.

90

Figure 1.

Proportion of Melodic Intervals that are Semitones

The way that Chopin selects his primary time signatures by mode is also significantly different (p = .001), with major mode consisting of much more use of compound time signature as compared to the minor mode, as shown in Figure 2. Of the 93 major mode works, 17 (18%) are compound time signatures, 76 (82%) are simple time signatures, of which 5 (5%) are cut time. Of the 87 minor mode works, only 5 (6%) are compound time signatures, with a large 82

(94%) simple time signatures. Notably, of these, a full 15 (17%) works are in cut time. The greater prevalence of compound time signatures may reflect a greater usage of dance music in the major mode. The compound meter may also reflect the simpler affect associated with the pastoral topics.

91

Figure 2.

Distribution of Time Signature Denominator by Mode

The choice of mode also influences the way that Chopin favors one range of the keyboard over another. Specifically, the minor mode, as expressing a darker affect, emphasizes the bass register of the keyboard significantly more than the major mode (p =.001), as shown in

Figure 3. Recall that emphasis on the bass register reflects the proportion of notes in a work below F3. The major mode mean proportion of bass pitches is 21.5%, whereas the minor mode usage is 26.0% of pitches below F3. Related to the bass prevalence effect, the overall mean pitch of the work is also significantly lower in minor than in major. The mean pitch is 3.5 semitones above middle C in the major mode, but only 1.9 semitones above middle C in the minor mode (p

= .003).

92

Figure 3.

Importance of Bass Register by Mode

The category with the fourth biggest differences between major and minor modes is the number of pitch-classes used, measured as simply the total number of discrete pitch-classes that appear at least once in a piece, regardless of enharmonic equivalence. The effect size here is pretty small: in major mode works, the average number of distinct pitch-classes is 11.78 (out of

12), and in minor mode works, it is 11.94. In other words, Chopin’s compositions typically demonstrate something close to chromatic saturation, but minor mode works tend to more frequently use all 12 pitch classes (p =.03). This may likely be influenced by the increased number of ‘diatonic’ pitches in the minor mode, which more liberally permits different versions of the same scale degree, and may not be a reflection of some affective characteristics.

One downside to examining individual correlations between musical features and mode is that some musical features may co-vary with one another. The consequence is that by examining 93

each feature independently, it may appear to overpredict the influence of establishing the mode of a piece by looking at individual features alone. The best way to compensate for this kind of overfitting is to look at all 685 musical features simultaneously with machine learning to determine which are the most helpful in statistically distinguishing between the usage of major and minor modes. Using Weka’s CfsSubsetEval function, we determined that the most significant predictors of mode were the following five musical features combined: the number of pitch-classes used, the dominant spread, the pitch-class kurtosis after folding, the most common melodic interval, and the distance between the two most common vertical intervals. Some explanation is needed for each of these.

The dominant spread of a work measures the largest number of consecutive pitch classes separated by perfect fifths that each individually account for at least 9% of the total notes in the piece. This variable features a fairly large effect size between the modes. Major mode works demonstrate a mean dominant spread of 4.4 pitch-classes, whereas minor mode works only demonstrate a mean dominant spread of 3.8 pitch-classes (p =.007).

The pitch-class kurtosis measures how peaked or flat the pitch classes are from a dominant-tonic perspective. This particular metric is folded around the circle of fifths so that it does not matter where on the circle of fifths the peaks are located. The higher the kurtosis, the more the pitch classes are clustered near the mean and the fewer outliers there are. The difference between modes is once again significant, with major keys at a mean of 5.54 and minor keys at a mean of 5.22 (p = .009).

The final three measures are related to intervallic usage. The mean most common melodic interval, measured in semitones, for major modes is 3.06 (or a minor third), and the mean for minor modes is 2.59 (or halfway between a major second and a minor third). This 94

difference is not statistically significant (p = .3), but it does reflect larger average interval size for major modes, consistent with the semitone bias for minor modes seen above. This difference is also seen in the distance measured in semitones between the two most common vertical intervals

(major = 5.30, minor = 4.45, p =.008), a reflection of vertical interval variability.

Some of these differences seem musically significant, such as the dominant spread or the pitch-class kurtosis. However, some of the effect sizes are small and the musical interpretation of the features is not clear. It is possible that there may be statistical overfitting in the dataset. To see whether that is the case, we used machine learning to train the classifiers to detect differences between major and minor on a 95% training set and then tested how accurate the algorithm was at assigning mode based on those musical features to the 5% test set. We used a 20-folds cross- validation so that every piece would be in a training set 19 times and in a test-set 1 time. We employed the commonly-used support vector machine algorithm implemented as the SMO SVM by Weka to test this.

Given that there are only two possibilities for mode (major and minor) there is a 50% chance of randomly guessing a given work’s mode correctly. If the algorithm is not picking up generalizable statistical patterns in the music, then we would expect a 50% accuracy in the test sets simply from guessing by chance. After running the 20-folds cross-validation, the SMO algorithm correctly predicted mode 57.22% of the time. Specifically for major mode works, 54 works (58%) were correctly assigned to the major mode and 39 (42%) were assigned to the minor mode. For minor mode works, 49 works (56%) were correctly assigned to the minor mode and 38 (44%) were assigned to the major mode. These numbers are not statistically higher than chance assignment (χ2 = 3.72, p =.054), but they are close. Recall that before analysis, we a priori eliminated all musical features that we thought would be reflective of mode rather than of 95

key attributes, such as major vs. minor triad prevalence and major vs. minor 3rds, etc. We only retained what we considered to be non-mode specific features, such as meter, rhythmic activity, and chromatic half-step motion. Nevertheless, some elements of major/minor key usage may have persisted in features like dominant spread and pitch-class kurtosis. Even without typical mode identifiers, a number of features were still significantly correlated with mode. However, the failure of the algorithm to correctly assign mode greater than chance is likely due to this a priori elimination of musical features that reflect mode.

Accidental Category

The second type of analysis we conducted was a three-category analysis involving key signature accidental category, regardless of mode. In other words, all major and minor sharp keys were considered in the same category, all major and minor flat keys were considered in the same category, and C major and A minor with no key signature were categorized together. This analysis was geared towards examining whether position on the circle of fifths could account for significant variability among musical feature composition by Chopin.

Again, we began by examining individual musical features that most strongly correlated with accidental category. In Chopin’s piano corpus, 90 works/movements were considered “flat,”

68 were considered “sharp,” and 22 were considered “none,” that is either C major or A minor.

The strongest correlation by accidental category is pitch class variability after folding, a measure of the standard deviation of the pitch-classes in the piece after being folded along the line of fifths. In other words, this measure reveals how close all of the pitch-classes used in a 96

piece clump around the mean pitch class along the circle of fifths. So, the higher the pitch class variability, the less clumped together along the circle of fifths the pitch-classes are. Because there are three categories of accidental, we conducted an ANOVA rather than a t-test. The result of the ANOVA revealed a significant effect of accidental category on pitch class variability after folding (p < .00001), as shown in Figure 4. A post-hoc Tukey Honest Significant Difference test revealed that all accidental categories were significantly different from one another (p < .00001).

Specifically, the sharper the key signature, the more clumped around a central tonic-dominant polarity the pitch-class usage is. To put it in the opposite sense, Chopin employed much broader modulatory freedom and distant tonal/pitch relationships in flatter keys. This might reflect the affect of flatter keys as being more adventurous. However, it may reflect Chopin’s comfort with playing in flat keys, as perhaps hinted at by there being so many more flat compositions than sharp or no-accidental compositions. Similarly, there is also an effect of accidental category on pitch class kurtosis after folding, which is a measure of how closely all the pitch classes cluster around the mean. Notably, flat keys are significantly less clustered around the mean pitch-class

(mean = 5.04) than sharp (mean = 5.83) or none keys (5.71), which are statistically indistinguishable from each other. Beyond these metrics of tonal variability, no other single musical features appear to be both musically meaningful and significantly correlated between accidental categories.

97

Figure 4.

Pitch-class variability after folding by accidental category

After examining these individual musical feature correlations, we once again built a machine-learning algorithm to examine the effect of accidental category on all 685 musical features simultaneously using Weka’s CfSSubsetEval function. Not surprisingly, the only significant musical features were the ones already examined individually above. This suggests that looking at Chopin’s use of expression by accidental category is too broad. Rather than finding specific affects that adhere to entire accidental categories, this machine-learning algorithm instead has unearthed compositional biases relating to how freely Chopin modulates between keys on the flat side versus the sharp side of the circle of fifths. To our knowledge, the increased modulatory freedom of flat key works in Chopin’s repertoire has never been discovered before. 98

However, when building a classification system (as we did for mode above), there is a

66% accuracy rate on assigning a work to either sharp, flat, or none categories through a 20-folds cross validation, reproduced in Table 5. In other words, 66.1% of works are correctly classified, significantly higher than chance given the three categories (χ2 = 49.5, p < .00001), suggesting that there are indeed musical features that belie the accidental categorization of Chopin’s piano music. Even if individual features are only loosely connected to accidental category, it appears that many features combined together are significantly predictive of Chopin’s accidental category. However, it appears that the majority of the effect is again based on Chopin’s pitch- class variability around the tonic-dominant polarity.

Table 5.

A confusion matrix based on the machine-learning algorithm’s ability to sort accidental category using low-level musical features.

a b c ←classified as 69 16 5 | a = flat 15 47 6 | b = sharp 10 9 3 | c = none

Mode X Accidental Category

As noted above, mode is a very important component of affect, with major and minor modes playing a largely different role in communicating affect. Rather than just looking at accidental category, it would be illuminating to divide accidental categories by modal color. This results in 99

six mode X accidental categories: major sharp (30 works), minor sharp (38 works), major flat

(52 works), minor flat (38 works), C major (11 works), and A minor (11 works).

Again, we began by looking at individual musical features most strongly correlated with these six categories. Given that mode X accidental category combines the distinguishing features of mode categories by themselves and accidental categories by themselves, it is not surprising that the individual features separating mode X accidental are common with those seen earlier.

Specifically, in order the most strongly correlated musical features with mode X accidental categories are: pitch class variability after folding, pitch class skewness after folding, pitch class kurtosis after folding, the importance of the bass register, mean pitch, and the proportion of semitone melodic motion.

All six of these musical features demonstrate significant ANOVAs, consistent with the mode X accidental category having an effect on their compositional deployment by Chopin.

However, it is not always the case that all of six mode X accidental categories are significantly distinguishable from all other categories. Consider the effect of mode X accidental category on pitch-class variability after folding, shown in Figure 5. Considering this a two-way factorial design with a mode variable and an accidental variable, the only significant effect is on accidental (p < .00001), whereas the mode main effect is not significant (p = .66) and mode X accidental is also not significant (p = .08). What this means is that there is a main effect of accidental on pitch-class variability after folding, replicating the results from the above accidental examination alone, and that no other variance can be accounted for by mode. This means that Chopin’s tendency to use more pitch-classes that are chromatically further from the tonic-dominant polarity is dependent on key signature alone and not on mode.

100

Figure 5.

Pitch-class variability after folding by mode X accidental category

The same accidental main effect also holds for pitch class skewness after folding and pitch class kurtosis after folding. However, pitch class kurtosis after folding also demonstrates a significant main effect on mode, with higher kurtosis for major mode works, regardless of accidental (p < .00001). Pitch class skewness after folding also demonstrates a significant interaction between mode and accidental (p < .00001), such that minor mode flat keys show more skewness than major mode flat keys, but minor none and minor sharp show less skewness than their major mode equivalents (shown in Figure 6). It is not immediately clear what the musical significance or meaning of this finding is, and it may simply be the result of overfitting.

101

Figure 6.

Pitch-class skewness after folding by mode X accidental category

On the contrary, the importance of the bass register and mean pitch both appear to primarily have a main effect on mode (p = .0009, p = .003 respectively), even though both also demonstrate a slight interaction with accidental category ((p = .01 in both cases). Finally, the relative proportion of semitone melodic motion only has a significant effect on mode (p < .0001).

The relative isolation of the effects on either mode or accidental category suggests that any real interactions between these categories as correlated against individual musical features is likely to be incidental.

In training the machine learning algorithm to differentiate between the six mode X accidental categories using 20-folds cross validation, the algorithm’s accuracy rates fall to

38.33% correct. Although the accuracy is below 50%, with 6 categories this accuracy rate is still significantly better than chance (χ2 = 66.1, p < .00001), again consistent with the notion that the 102

same musical features are able to map onto characteristics of the six mode X accidental categories as composed by Chopin. Table 6 shows the confusion matrix, revealing how mode X accidental categories tend to be miscategorized.

Table 6.

A confusion matrix based on the machine-learning algorithm’s ability to sort mode X accidental category using low-level musical features.

=== Confusion Matrix ===

a b c d e f ← classified as

14 10 5 4 2 3 | a = minor_flat

17 24 3 5 1 2 | b = major_flat

5 4 19 4 4 2 | c = minor_sharp

3 6 11 9 0 1 | d = major_sharp

2 2 5 0 1 1 | e = minor_none

4 2 0 2 1 2 | f = major_none

Key categorization

The most relevant, but also the most perilous, categorization task for the purpose of this investigation into the theory of affects, is how individual keys may reflect expressive musical characteristics distinguishable from all other keys. From a statistical perspective, this is the most challenging and prone to failure, because in order to correctly classify any piece by key, each key 103

would have to demonstrate completely unique musical features in combinations distinct from all other keys. Moreover, this analysis suffers from a lack of data, as several keys are missing entirely (as noted above), and several keys only have a few pieces to represent them, making generalizations difficult.

Nevertheless, we can examine which musical features in isolation most strongly correlate with distinct key characteristics. Given the statistical problems, these correlations are much weaker than when several keys were lumped together into categories. The following musical features demonstrated the strongest correlations: pitch class variability, pitch class skewness, pitch class kurtosis, the primary time signature denominator, whether the primary time signature is a simple meter, the prevalence of vertical sixths, the importance of the bass register, the proportion of chromatic semitone melodic motion, and the total number of notes.

Given how many key categories there are (25), it is difficult to interpret findings correlating only one musical feature with specific keys. For one example, consider pitch-class kurtosis after folding by key, shown in Figure 7. As is clearly evident through informal observation of the figure, the ANOVA demonstrates that there is indeed an effect of key on kurtosis, which different keys averaging to different skewness levels. However, it is difficult to understand the musical significance of this effect. For example, the distributions of kurtosis by key are very similar for B-flat major, c minor, E-flat major, F minor, F major, and G minor.

Though these are all flat keys, it is not clear what the theory of affects would claim are commonalities between them. Consider D-flat major, which is fairly close on the circle of fifths and yet has a very different distribution. Given how many different key categories there are, the same basic patterns are evident for each significant musical feature noted above.

104

Figure 7.

Pitch-class kurtosis after folding by specific key

Nor should these kind of results be surprising. After all, affect is an emergent property of many different musical features combining together to create expressive meaning. So, examining individual musical features is at best problematic in determining a key’s affect. The better thing to do is to compare all musical features simultaneously, and examine the accuracy of the model’s key assignment. In training the machine learning algorithm to differentiate pieces by key, there were many more categories than earlier comparisons. Some keys are only represented two or three times. If more than one piece with a rare key is randomly assigned to the test set, then that key would not show up in the training set and there is almost no chance it would be classified correctly. Therefore, we increased our cross-folds validation to 60-folds, meaning that the training set would consist of 177 works and the test set would only consist of three works. 105

Given how many key categories there are, the accuracy rate plummeted to 11.1%.

However, with 25 categories, randomly guessing chance assignment would only yield something like 4% accuracy. Therefore, this accuracy rate is still significantly better than chance, though a chi-square test is not possible given how sparse the data are distributed (see Table 7; any categories with 0 break the division required for the test). This is consistent with the theory that the machine learning algorithm is detecting musically relevant identifiers of key in combinations that accurately predict key.

106

Table 7.

A confusion matrix based on the machine-learning algorithm’s ability to sort key category using low-level musical features. Given how big the matrix is, note the prevalence of 0 values, which makes calculated chi-square impossible.

=== Confusion Matrix ===

a b c d e f g h I j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y ←classified as 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 | a = c 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 | b = E- 1 3 4 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 | c = A- 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 | d = F 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 | e = f# 1 0 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 | f = c# 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 | g = E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 | h = e- 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 | i = B- 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 | j = a 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 | k = f 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 | l = C 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 | m = b- 0 1 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 | n = B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 | o = G- 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 | p = F# 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 | q = g 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 | r = e 2 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 | s = b 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 | t = G 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 | u = g# 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 | v = D- 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 | w = D 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 | x = A 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 | y = d

107

CHAPTER V.

CONCLUSION

Invented by Bartolomeo Cristofori (1655-1731) in the seventeenth century, the piano continued to evolve, and by the nineteenth century, the operating principles of the instrument, or mechanisms, were almost at our present level. The focus of this study is not just on looking at the changes in temperament centered on piano and keyboard instruments that achieved high mechanical perfection. The study further aims to compare how the key of Chopin’s music was consistent with key characteristics, which had been known since the seventeenth century in

European music.

The concept of key characteristics, in other word, every individual key has its own character has long been a controversial issue. The first document about these arguments dates back to the late 1600s, when music quickly moved from the modal to the tonal, with a mixture of meantone and well-tempered temperament. Meanwhile, the idea of key characteristics continued to be passed on to later generations during the settlement of tonal music, and through the process, it became a kind of “collective unconscious.” In the process of cultural transmission, each impression was preserved intact and learned, added to new impressions, changed disposition, or reproduced with past impressions.

Rita Steblin’s research is a form of opinion that proves that the composer's keys in his/her work are not just individual tendencies in each piece but may be due to the consequences of social learning. In this study, Steblin synthesizes opinions of the key characteristic, which had been handed down for nearly 150 years. 108

There are several interesting points in this catalogue. First, the impressions that a single key has accompanied have a certain common denominator that penetrates all of them. For example, a total of 38 records from 1691 to 1843, which Steblin mentioned, were represented as the militant, splendid, and pure character, and C major consistently accompanied these expressions for 150 years. On the other hand, the A-flat major, a total of 30 documents from the late 1700s to 1843, was a key with the impression of majesty, gentle, and tender, and the trend of such impressions lasted for at least fifty years. Both C minor and F minor are similar in that they deal with tragic impressions, but C minor fits to express more tragic sentiments than F minor, which was considered more appropriate for social and public tragic situations, such as funeral marches.

Chopin's piano music is very useful for examining key characteristics, which were still recognized in the nineteenth century. In particular, the fact that he was a very good pianist- composer and that the piano of his time had reached a high mechanical level of perfection makes it very advantageous to look at the connection between the key and the traditional character in

Chopin's work, making it more understandable to his personal conception of the key.

The study examined Chopin's whole works’ tonalities and classified the music related to the keys by characteristics. The conclusions obtained from this survey are as follows.

1. Chopin’s favorite keys exist throughout his entire works. 94 works in major keys from

his entire works, and among them, A-flat major (21.2%) and C major (11.7%) counted

overwhelming numbers. Among the 87 works in minor keys, C-sharp minor (16%) is the

most popular key, followed by F minor (12.6%) and C minor (12.6%).

2. Most of the individual characters produced by the keys in Chopin's music are either

consistent with or reflected in Steblin's study documents. This suggests that at least 109

Chopin or composers had a certain consensus on the key characteristic. For example,

Chopin's A-flat major's impressions are usually rich in tender or majesty character,

which has a constant emotional flow regardless of the tempo of the work. On the other

hand, most of Chopin’s C major appeared in simple dance pieces, such as mazurka, and

is largely in line with C major's traditional impression of simplicity. Chopin’s F minor is

actively represented by the gloomy and funerary mood known as this key’s properties.

On the other hand, his C minor is often accompanied by a significantly expanded energy

of more tragic music than his F minor.

3. If Chopin emphasizes certain moods, such as gloomy characteristics, in his work, it is

discovered that his specialized composition style exists in the music. Chopin, for

example, reinforced the gloomy feeling in his work by using intentional interval spaces

in the vertical harmony or by omitting any of the members from the chord; by

emphasizing a particular stepwise in the progression of harmonic language, it is more

important than the melodic contour or the types of the melody itself. Melancholy

emotions have increased further as these musical characteristics create a synergy in F

minor diatonic system.

I have emphasized continuously throughout this study, particular keys are prone to express particular kinds of musical expression. These musical characteristics arise through a complex relationship between many different musical features. The issue is further complicated because the same key can have different modes of expression. For example, as indicated above,

A-flat major has at least three different kinds of emotion in Chopin’s music, based on how

Chopin combines his musical features to express particular ideas such as tender mood with a 110

simple melody, gloomy feeling with a slow tempo, and majestic feeling emphasized by increased dynamics.

Moreover, though tending towards particular moods specific to those keys, several keys overlap with other keys with similar kinds of expression. For example, C minor and F minor both have funeral tendencies colored by different secondary musical features, such as by increasing the dynamics of C minor, the mood of intense sadness is emphasized, and in F minor, the unique acoustic arrangement is used to express gloomy sadness.

Given the lack of extreme specificity and single meaning attached to individual keys and given the relatively small size of the database (though 180 works is a lot, several keys only have a small number of works in those keys), it is difficult to make too many statistically valid conclusions about the affection of particular keys. This is unfortunate because the theory of affects ascribes specific expressions to specific keys, not necessarily to groups of keys.

However, this statistical investigation has unearthed some correlations between broader categories of keys relating to the affection of those key categories that seem musically significant. For example, minor mode music does have a darker, sadder, and more reflective expression in general than major mode music. This was reflected in the use of chromatic half- step motion, darker timbers in the lower ranges of the keyboard, and simple meters that are more reflective of the somber expressions not as commonly associated with compound time signatures. Moreover, Chopin’s use of more adventurous harmonic and modulatory motions in flat keys seems to be a novel discovery of this statistical examination.

It bears repeating that key affection is an emergent property of musical expression that arises from complex interactions between many different musical features. This approach is reflected in the machine-learning classification exercise, in which it was shown that by 111

examining hundreds of musical features simultaneously. It is possible to more accurately assign a key, a mode, or an accidental category than chance, consistent with the notion that there are indeed complex emergent properties of many different musical features that reflect those keys or classes.

However, the relatively small size of a database of only 180 works for twenty-five key categories reinforces the value that traditional modes of musical analysis retain by providing close readings of individual works that draw on the analysts’ sensitivity and expertise in the subject, rather than an impersonal and mechanistic process that removes the scholar from the musical surface. In short, the most musically pertinent analysis of key affection remains the thoughtful scholar performing close readings and analysis in traditional ways.

Nevertheless, it is only a strength to combine several modes of analysis that converge on similar interpretations. Although the individual scholar can understand and analyze musical meaning in much richer ways than a machine-learning algorithm, the machine learning algorithm is much better at (say) counting vertical sixths as a proportion of all vertical two-note intervals in a piece of music and correlating this kind of musical expression with, for example, the simpler expression found in pastoral music. Similarly, the machine-learning approach provides insight into modulatory adventurousness in flat keys or increased usage of chromatic semitone motion in minor mode works in ways that are more difficult for the individual scholar to observe.

The wise scholar draws on whatever analysis resources are available. We can tell the most comprehensive story about musically relevant aspects of affective expression when we are ecumenical enough to allow various analytical strategies to interact with one another. Ultimately, each type of analysis has its strengths and weaknesses, and we can be most sure about a 112

conclusion when we see converging evidence from many different approaches that all point to similar evidence.

As mentioned earlier, Steblin’s work results from tracking individual characteristics on each key through documents. The breadth of probe Steblin established in her research is a periodical consideration of what concepts are accompanied by individual keys, which does not prove how this reference emerges in the actual works. The purpose of this study is to see if such a concept of key characteristics was still in existence in the nineteenth century and to do so, to model Chopin's work, the tendency of the key to appearing in his music. Because he was a pianist-composer, and his virtuosity makes the most meaningful his first tonal in his music.

Moreover, he has a more powerful population in piano music than any of his contemporary composers. The population is a more intuitive model to mine the relationship between individual tendencies and collective notions about the key characteristics is why this study focused on

Chopin's work as the main issue.

113

Appendix A

THE KEY CLASSIFICATION OF CHOPIN’S WORKS

Major

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Mazurkas Op.7 No.5 1830-31 Etudes Op.10 No.1 Nov 1830 Etudes Op.10 No.7 1832 Bolero Op.19 1833 Mazurkas Op.24 No.2 1834-5

C Major (11) Twenty-four Preludes 1839 Op.28 No.1 Mazurkas Op.33 No.3 1837-8 Mazurkas Op.56 No.2 1843 Mazurkas Op.67 No.3 1835 Mazurkas Op.68 No.1 1829 Rondo Op.73a 1828

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Etudes Op.25 No.8 1832-4 Nocturnes Op.27 No.2 1835

Twenty-four Preludes 1839 Op.28 No.15

D-flat Major (8) Mazurkas Op.30 No.3 1836-7 Berceuse Op.57 1844 Waltzes Op.64 No.1 1846-7 Waltzes Op.70 No.3 1829

Three Ecossaises 1826 Op.72 No.5

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Twenty-four Preludes 1839 Op.28 No. 5 D Major (3) Mazurkas Op.33 No.2 1838

Three Ecossaises 1826 Op.72 No.3

114

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Sonata Op.4 movement II 1828 Nocturnes Op.9 No.2 1830-1 Etudes Op.10 No.11 1829 Rondo Op.16 1832 Waltzes Op.18 1831 E-flat Major (9) Grand Polonaise brilliant 1831 Op.22

Twenty-four Preludes 1839 Op.28 No.19 Nocturnes Op.55 No.2 1842-4 Sonata Op.58 movement II 1844

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Mazurkas Op.6 No.3 1830 Etudes Op.10 No.3 25 Aug 1832

E Major (5) Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.9 Scherzo Op.54 1842-3 Nocturnes Op.62 No.2 1846

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Rondo à la Mazur Op.5 1826 Etudes Op.10 No.8 1829 Nocturnes Op.15 No.1 1830-31

Etudes Op.25 No.3 1836 F Major (8) Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.23 Waltzes Op.34 No.3 1838 Ballade Op.38 1839 Mazurkas Op.68 No.3 c1830

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Nocturnes Op.15 No.2 1830-31

Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 F# Major (4) Op.28 No.13 Impromptu Op.36 1839 Barcarolle Op.60 1845-6

115

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Etudes Op.10 No.5 1830

G-flat Major (4) Etudes Op.25 No.9 1832-4 Impromptu Op.51 Aut. 1842 Waltzes Op.70 No.1 1832

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Andante Spianato Op.22 1834 Twenty-four Preludes 1839

Op.28 No.3 G Major (6) Nocturnes Op.37 No.2 1839 Mazurkas Op.50 No.1 1842 Mazurkas Op.67 No.1 c1835 Three Ecossaises Op. 72-4 c1829

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Sonata Op.4 movement III 1828 Mazurkas Op.7 No.4 1830-31 Etudes Op.10 No.10 1829 Mazurkas Op.17 No.3 1832-3 Mazurkas Op.24 No.3 1834-5 Etudes Op.25 No.1 1836

Twenty-four Preludes 1836 Op.28 No.17 Impromptu Op.29 c1837 A-flat Major (20) Nocturnes Op.32 No.2 1837 Waltzes Op.34 No.1 15 Sep. 1835 Mazurkas Op.41 No.3 1839 Waltz Op.42 1840 Tarantella Op.43 1841 Ballade Op.47 1841 Mazurkas Op.50 No.2 1842 Polonaise Op.53 1842-3 Mazurkas Op.59 No.2 1845 Polonaise-Fantasie Op.61 1846 Waltzes Op.64 No.3 1847 Waltzes Op.69 No.1 1835

116

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Twenty-four Preludes 1836 A Major (3) Op.28 No.7 Polonaises Op.40 No.1 1838 Allegro de concert Op.46 1841

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Mazurkas Op.7 No.1 1830-31 Variations brilliante Op.12 1832 Mazurkas Op.17 No.1 1832-3 B-flat Major (5) Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.21 Polonaises Op.71 No.2 1828

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Nocturnes Op.9 No.3 1830-31

Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.11 Nocturnes Op.32 No.1 1837 B Major (8) Mazurkas Op.41 No.2 1839 Mazurkas Op.56 No.1 1843 Sonata Op.58 movement III 1844 Nocturnes Op.62 No.1 1846 Mazurkas Op.63 No.1 1846

117

Minor

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Rondo Op.1 1825 Sonata Op.4 movement I 1828 Sonata Op.4 movement IV 1828 Etudes Op.10 No.12 1831 Etudes Op.25 No.12 1836 C minor (11) Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.20 Mazurkas Op.30 No.1 1837 Polonaises Op.40 No.2 1839 Nocturnes Op.48 No.1 1841 Mazurkas Op.56 No.3 1843 Funeral March Op.72 No.2 c1826

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Mazurkas Op.6 No.2 1830 Etudes Op.10 No.4 Aug. 1832 Etudes Op.25 No.7 1836 Polonaises Op.26 No.1 1835 Nocturnes Op.27 No.1 1835

Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.10 C# minor (14) Mazurkas Op.30 No.4 1837 Scherzo Op.39 1839 Mazurkas Op.41 No.4 1839 Prelude Op.45 1841 Mazurkas Op.50 No.3 1842 Mazurkas Op.63 No.3 1846 Waltzes Op.64 No.2 1847 [Fantasie] Impromptu Op.66 c1834

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 D minor (2) Op.28 No.24 Polonaises Op.71 No.1 1827-8

118

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Mazurkas Op.6 No.4 1830 Etudes Op.10 No.6 1830

E-flat minor (5) Polonaises Op.26 No.2 1835

Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.14 Sonata Op.35 movement II 1837

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Mazurkas Op.17 No.2 1832-3 Etudes Op.25 No.5 1832-4

E minor (5) Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.4 Mazurkas Op.41 No.1 28 Nov 1838 Nocturnes Op.72 No.1 c1829

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Mazurkas Op.7 No.3 1830-31 Etudes Op.10 No.9 1829 Etudes Op.25 No.2 1836

Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.18 F minor (11) Fantasie Op.49 1841 Ballade Op.52 1842-3 Nocturnes Op.55 No.1 1842-4 Mazurkas Op.63 No.2 1846 Mazurkas Op.68 No.4 ?1846 Waltzes Op.70 No.2 1842 Polonaises Op.71 No.3 1828

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Mazurkas Op.6 No.1 1830 Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 F# minor (5) Op.28 No.8 Polonaise Op.44 1841 Nocturnes Op.48 No.2 1841 Mazurkas Op.59 No.3 1845

119

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Nocturnes Op.15 No.3 1833

Ballade Op.23 Sketched 1831 Completed Paris, 1835 Mazurkas Op.24 No.1 1834-5 G minor (6) Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.22 Nocturnes Op.37 No.1 1838 Mazurkas Op.67 No.2 1848/9

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Etudes Op.25 No.6 1832-4

G# minor (3) Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.12 Mazurkas Op.33 No.1 1838

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Mazurkas Op.7 No.2 1831 Etudes Op.10 No.2 Nov 1830 Mazurkas Op.17 No.4 1832-3 Etudes Op.25 No.4 1832-4 Etudes Op.25 No.11 1834 A minor (10) Twenty-four Prelude 1838-9 Op.28 No.2 Waltzes Op.34 No.2 c1834 Mazurkas Op.59 No.1 1845 Mazurkas Op.67 No.4 1846 Mazurkas Op.68 No.2 c1827

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Nocturnes Op.9 No.1 1830-31 Mazurkas Op.24 No.4 1834-5

Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 Op.28 No.16 B-flat minor (7) Scherzo Op.31 1837 Sonata Op.35 movement I 1837

Sonata Op.35 movement III 1837 (funeral march) Sonata Op.35 movement IV 1837 120

Key Title of the work Year of composition

Scherzo Op.20 1831 (revised 1832) Etudes Op.25 No.10 1832-4 Twenty-four Preludes 1838-9 B minor (8) Op.28 No.6 Mazurkas Op.30 No.2 1837 Mazurkas Op.33 No.4 1838 Sonata Op.58 movement I Sum. 1844 Sonata Op.58 movement IV Sum. 1844 Waltzes Op.69 No.2 1829

MAJOR TOTAL C D E F F# G A B D♭ E♭ G♭ A♭ B♭ 94 11 8 3 9 5 8 4 4 6 20 3 5 8

MINOR TOTAL C C# D E♭ E F F# G G# A B♭ B 87 11 14 2 5 5 11 5 6 3 10 7 8

Progressive pieces Op.19 Bolero Op.31 Scherzo Op.38 Ballade Op.49 Fantasie

C major B-flat major F major F minor ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ A major D-flat major A minor A-flat major

Key of Chopin’s piano works

MAJOR MINOR 94 87 =181

121

Appendix B

GRAPH OF MODES

25

20 20

15 14

11 11 11 10 9 10 8 8 8 8 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 5 3 3 3 2

0 G- e- D- b- A- f E- c B- g F d C a G e D b A f# E c# B g# F#

Major Minor

122

Appendix C

THE TONALITY PROPORTATION IN CHOPIN’S PIANO MUSIC

TOTAL (181) IN MODE Mode Key Number % % C 11 6 11.7 D-flat 8 4.4 8.5 D 3 1.7 3.2 E-flat 9 5 9.6 E 5 2.8 5.3 Major F 8 4.4 51.9% 8.5 (94) F#/G-flat 8 4.4 8.5 G 6 3.3 6.4 A-flat 20 11 21.2 A 3 1.7 3.2 B-flat 5 2.8 5.3 B 8 4.4 8.5 C 11 6 12.6 C# 14 7.7 16.1 D 2 1.1 2.3 E-flat 5 2.8 5.7 E 5 2.8 5.7 Minor F 11 6.1 48.1% 12.6 (87) F# 5 2.8 5.7 G 6 3.3 6.9 G# 3 1.7 3.4 A 10 5.5 11.5 B-flat 7 3.9 8 B 8 4.4 9.2

123

REFERENCES

Adler, Samuel. The Study of Orchestration. 3rd ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2002.

Albrecht, Joshua and Shanahan, Daniel. “The Use of Large Corpora to Train a New Type of Key-Finding Algorithm: An Improved Treatment of the Minor Mode.” Music Perception 31, no. 1 (September 2013): 59-67.

Berg, E. Richard, and Stork, David G. The Physics of Sound. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Pearson Education, Inc., 2005.

Brown, Maurice J. E., Chopin An Index of His Works in Chronological Order. 2nd ed. London: Macmillan Education. 1972.

Duckles, Vincent. “Musicology.” The Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. 2nd ed. Stanley Sadie(ed), vol.12. London: Macmillan Publishers Ltd, 2002.

Duffin, Ross W. in Chapter 7 “Some Are More Equal Than Others” How Equal Temperament Ruined Harmony (and Why You Should Care). New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2007.

Ellis, Alexander J. in Studies in the History of Music Pitch: Monographs by Alexander J. Ellis and Arthur Mendel. Amsterdam: Frits Knuf, 1968; New York: Da Capo Press.

Figes, Orlando. The Europeans. Rogers, New York: Metropolitan Books Henry Holt and Company, 2019.

Finlow, Simon. “The Twenty-seven etudes and their antecedents,” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, Jim Samson ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Goodall, Howard. “The Age of Elegance and Sentiment 1750–1850.” The Story of Music. New York: Pegasus Bools LLC. 2013.

Grétry, André-Ernest-Modeste. Mémoires, ou Essais sur las musique. Paris: l'imprimerie de la République, 1796/1797 (Republican year 5).

Grout, Donald Jay. A History of Western Music. 9th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2014.

Hadden, J. Cuthbert, Chopin, Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press Ltd., 2002.

Hand, Ferdinand. Asthetik der Tonkunst. 1837 (Cited from Steblin p.230)

124

Haynes, Bruce. A History of Performing Pitch: The Story of "A" Lanham. Maryland: The Scarecrow Press, 2002.

Herbert, Trevor. The Trombone. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2006.

Huneker, James. Chopin the Man and His Music: From a 1900 edition. Auckland: The Floating Press, 2008.

Kallberg, Jeffrey. “Small 'forms': in defence of the prelude,” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, Jim Samson ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Krumhansl, C. L. The cognitive foundations of musical pitch. New York: Oxford University Press, 1978.

Krumhansl, C. L., Kessler, E. J. “Tracing the dynamic changes in perceived tonal organization in a spatial representation of musical keys.” Psychological Review 89, no.4 (July 1982): 334- 368.

Latham, Alison. ed. “Polonaise.” The Oxford Companion to Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Leikin, Anatole. “The sonatas.” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, ed by Jim Samson. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

______. The Mystery of Chopin’s Préludes. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2015.

Mathuen-Campbell, James. “Chopin in Performance,” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, Jim Samson ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Oxford Dictionary of English 3rd Revised ed. London: Oxford University Press España, S.A. 2010.

Panetta, Vincent J, trans and ed. Treatise on Harpsichord Tuning by Jean Denis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.

Rendall, Matthew, “Defensive Realism and the Concert of Europe,” Review of International Studies 32, no. 3 (July 2006): 523-540.

R. Lowe Thompson, The History of the Devil. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., Ltd., 1929

Rowland, David. “The Nocturne Development of a New Style,” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, Jim Samson, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Sassoon, Donald. The Culture of the Europeans – from 1800 to the Present. London: HarperCollins Publishers Inc, 2006. 125

Schilling, Gustav. Universal-Lexicon der Tonkunst. Stuttgart: F.H. Köhler, 1835-36. (Steblin p. 279)

Steblin, Rita. A History of Key Characteristics in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries. 2nd ed. New York: University of Rochester Press, 2002.

Thomas, Andrian. “Beyond the dance,” The Cambridge Companion to Chopin, Jim Samson ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Watson, Peter. German Genius-Europe’s Third Renaissance, the Second Scientific Revolution, and the Twentieth Century. Australia: HarperCollins Publishers Inc, 2010.