Chopin

[zamyrabyrd]

...you don't think the central section of the first Scherzo is a temporary emotional reprieve?
Okaaaaaaay then. *backs towards the exit slowly*

I didn't say that but unlike many trios, it is an independent theme in its own right. You are free to disagree.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I would say the B section of the first scherzo is pretty clearly a contrasting unit to the A - it is in the tonic major, slower, harmonically and rhythmically more stable, and the return of the A section is almost literal except for the loss of a repeat. I would definitely call that a "temporary emotional reprieve" against the violence of the A section. The return of the A part in the Bb minor is decidedly truncated, not a characteristic of the classical style which is usually an exact repeat. The third scherzo is far more complex, with the trio (the "how dry I am!" part) recurring several times and in different tonalities. This more fluid concept of an ABA structure is not unusual in Chopin; think also of the G major nocturne from op. 37 and the big C# minor mazurka.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I didn't say that but unlike many trios, it is an independent theme in its own right. You are free to disagree.

There is a great deal of variation. In an early Beethoven sonata like op. 2/3, the trio is little more than a set of figurations with no melodic interest. In the 9th symphony, it is an elaborate secondary structure. In the Schubert C major quintet, it is a separate lyrical andante in contrasting tempo and key.

I would not agree with the trio for Chopin 1 being "independent," as it has be considered within the movement of which it is a part. Yes, it has a theme, but there the contrast is to an A section which is almost athematic. I think it's fair to say, however, that we always have to consider the trio in relation to the main scherzo/minuet part. (For example, in the LvB quartet 18/6, the A section is highly syncopated, and the trio very regular in rhythm by contrast.)

[Madiel]

I didn't say that but unlike many trios, it is an independent theme in its own right. You are free to disagree.

I will only disagree to the extent that you suggest it is uncommon for trios to have independent themes.

[Jo498]

There are probably a few trios, especially in shorter pieces, that are close to the "menuetto", like being a minor mode variant of the menuetto theme. But I cannot think of an obvious example and it was certainly not the rule in mature Haydn, Mozart or in Beethoven scherzi.
This leads away from Chopin but usually the main section (that is, without the trio) of a menuet/scherzo already has some contrasting material. But this is very frequently only an expansion (often in the dominant key) of the theme presented first. So the menuet is already often "tripartite" like ABA with B often derived from A. Some large-scale late menuets of Haydn and some Beethoven Scherzi actually include often some kind of miniature sonata form in the main section. The scherzo of Schubert's "great C major" also has two fully-fledged themes.

[zamyrabyrd]

I will only disagree to the extent that you suggest it is uncommon for trios to have independent themes.

Didn't say that either but doesn't it make sense there is a musical connection between A and B?

[zamyrabyrd]

There are probably a few trios, especially in shorter pieces, that are close to the "menuetto", like being a minor mode variant of the menuetto theme. But I cannot think of an obvious example and it was certainly not the rule in mature Haydn, Mozart or in Beethoven scherzi.
This leads away from Chopin but usually the main section (that is, without the trio) of a menuet/scherzo already has some contrasting material. But this is very frequently only an expansion (often in the dominant key) of the theme presented first. So the menuet is already often "tripartite" like ABA with B often derived from A. Some large-scale late menuets of Haydn and some Beethoven Scherzi actually include often some kind of miniature sonata form in the main section. The scherzo of Schubert's "great C major" also has two fully-fledged themes.

I don't know if it is the interest of anyone else, but mine has to do with whether the Chopin Scherzi have any correlation to the form or spirit of a minuet or scherzo and trio. I see very little.
I do see a simplification of scoring in Beethoven trios as in Sonata in D, Op. 10 No. 3 and Op. 31 No. 3 in Eb. In fact in the first 4 Symphonies, there is definitely a thinning out of texture, where usually the brass are featured.

[(poco) Sforzando]

There are probably a few trios, especially in shorter pieces, that are close to the "menuetto", like being a minor mode variant of the menuetto theme. But I cannot think of an obvious example and it was certainly not the rule in mature Haydn, Mozart or in Beethoven scherzi.
This leads away from Chopin but usually the main section (that is, without the trio) of a menuet/scherzo already has some contrasting material. But this is very frequently only an expansion (often in the dominant key) of the theme presented first. So the menuet is already often "tripartite" like ABA with B often derived from A. Some large-scale late menuets of Haydn and some Beethoven Scherzi actually include often some kind of miniature sonata form in the main section. The scherzo of Schubert's "great C major" also has two fully-fledged themes.

I went through the Beethoven piano sonatas to see his practice in this regard, and though I didn't take notes, I would say as a rule he does not in the B sections derive material from the A. Instead the prevailing emphasis is contrastive. Sometimes a thinning of texture, but not invariably, and the material of the B section is generally simpler and rhythmically more regular. In terms of tonality, the contrast is between tonic major/minor, relative major/minor, submediant (when the A is in a minor key), and one subdominant (op. 10/3). But never a B section in the dominant. What you do often find in the A sections are "miniature sonata forms." This is quite obvious in the 9th symphony, for instance (where the A section of course is no longer quite so miniature).

[zamyrabyrd]

I went through the Beethoven piano sonatas to see his practice in this regard, and though I didn't take notes, I would say as a rule he does not in the B sections derive material from the A. Instead the prevailing emphasis is contrastive. Sometimes a thinning of texture, but not invariably, and the material of the B section is generally simpler and rhythmically more regular. In terms of tonality, the contrast is between tonic major/minor, relative major/minor, submediant (when the A is in a minor key), and one subdominant (op. 10/3). But never a B section in the dominant. What you do often find in the A sections are "miniature sonata forms." This is quite obvious in the 9th symphony, for instance (where the A section of course is no longer quite so miniature).

All of the above makes the Beethoven Scherzo even further away from Chopin's. I don't see "trio" in any of them. Schumann himself couldn't figure out why Chopin called them "Scherzi".

[zamyrabyrd]

I would not agree with the trio for Chopin 1 being "independent," as it has be considered within the movement of which it is a part. Yes, it has a theme, but there the contrast is to an A section which is almost athematic.

Scherzo No. 1 would be a reverse of more defined thematic material in the B section rather than the A, if B was supposed to be a stand in for trio. Chopin always struck me as an enigma in every way. I don't know how many hours I broke my head over his first pages as in the Polonaise-Fantasie and the 1st Ballade.

[Jo498]

I went through the Beethoven piano sonatas to see his practice in this regard, and though I didn't take notes, I would say as a rule he does not in the B sections derive material from the A. Instead the prevailing emphasis is contrastive. Sometimes a thinning of texture, but not invariably, and the material of the B section is generally simpler and rhythmically more regular. In terms of tonality, the contrast is between tonic major/minor, relative major/minor, submediant (when the A is in a minor key), and one subdominant (op. 10/3). But never a B section in the dominant. What you do often find in the A sections are "miniature sonata forms." This is quite obvious in the 9th symphony, for instance (where the A section of course is no longer quite so miniature).

May there is a misunderstanding: In what I wrote above with A and B I did not mean "Scherzo" and "Trio" but the section before the first double bar (=A) in the Scherzo/Menuetto proper and the stuff that comes after: B, or more often BA', so the scherzo proper is also tripartite, or more precisely a superposition of the bipartite structure indicated by the double bars and a tripartite structure because a variant of the first phrase is often closing the menuetto proper. Very commonly the A section goes to the dominant, the B (after the double bar) starts at the dominant, noodles around a bit and goes to the tonic for closing the menuetto proper.
If, as in Beethoven's 9th the scherzo proper is in sonata form this is basically just an expansion of this (like the sonata form probably started anyway in the 1740s or so by expanding bipartite dance forms).

And dominant key for the trio section is probably rare because this would only re-iterate the contrast from the sections of the Menuetto. Already Haydn has mediant keys in trios, to spice/color things up a bit (e.g. B flat major in his last  (D major) symphony, IIRC).

[amw]

I would say the B section of the first scherzo is pretty clearly a contrasting unit to the A - it is in the tonic major, slower, harmonically and rhythmically more stable, and the return of the A section is almost literal except for the loss of a repeat. I would definitely call that a "temporary emotional reprieve" against the violence of the A section. The return of the A part in the Bb minor is decidedly truncated, not a characteristic of the classical style which is usually an exact repeat. The third scherzo is far more complex, with the trio (the "how dry I am!" part) recurring several times and in different tonalities. This more fluid concept of an ABA structure is not unusual in Chopin; think also of the G major nocturne from op. 37 and the big C# minor mazurka.

Chopin's scherzi are very large structures by any standard (I think No. 4 runs to something like 900 bars) and the A sections themselves tend to be complicated enough structurally as to blur the lines between sections. This applies anyway in 2, 3 and 4, the 'trio' in No. 1 being set off by its slower tempo and the material remaining neatly confined within it.

No. 3 is actually a fairly simple structure on the large scale—scherzo (c#), trio (Db), scherzo (c#), trio (E)* and coda integrating elements of both. The return of the scherzo essentially 'finishes' the main structure with the trio recurrence in E being structurally superfluous, as is underlined by its much more hollow, muted nature (lacking the brilliance of the first appearance) and thematic transition directly into the coda. This trio-and-coda addition (which in itself is something like 300 bars long, iirc) is 'necessary' because the scherzo's A material remained unresolved both times, leading directly into the much more stable B material.** So Chopin must first destabilise the B material, it having an essentially secondary function, and then tie it to the A material which it at first seems to be totally independent from.

The trios in all four scherzi are pretty clearly delineated I think, usually by texture (quasi-heterophonic melody in No. 1, chordal and hymnlike in Nos. 2 and 3, simple melody-and-accompaniment in No. 4, all four being textures not used elsewhere in the piece) and key (B major, A major, D-flat major/E major, G-sharp minor). I personally don't see the logic in saying they aren't there?

(The only 'spiritual successors' I can think of to the Chopin Scherzi, right now, are the Queen Mab scherzo from Roméo et Juliette and the scherzo from Mahler 5, which of course have none of Chopin's darkness and whatever but are structurally (and in terms of instrumental demands) very similar... the only 'spiritual predecessor' I can think of is Beethoven's Op. 59/1. For dark-hued, ultrapowerful scherzo movements in a similar emotional vein I suppose there's Brahms Piano Concerto 2 but it's only superficially similar imo)

* It has been observed that for Chopin the counterpart to a minor key is often its relative major, not its parallel major. E major sounds more like the tonic than D-flat major, and its turn to E minor sometimes being mistaken for a turn to the tonic minor by persons without absolute pitch. However the piece does in fact end in C-sharp minor like every other piece Chopin wrote in this much-favoured key (with or without a picardy third—with one, in this case), so who knows.

** Brahms dealt with this problem much less elegantly in the finale of his F minor sonata (whose second episode is probably inspired by this scherzo along with Beethoven's Op. 2/3)

[zamyrabyrd]

I don't see any "trio" in the Chopin Scherzi. Ternary form where it applies but not "trio" as much as a three part song would have a "trio" in the middle, that in fact the Scherzi, in particular, nos. 1 and 4 compare better to.

[amw]

What exactly do you mean by a "trio" though? The contrasting/b sections aren't necessarily set up in a standard binary (A:||:B) or rounded binary (A:||:B A') form, and may be tonally unstable, but they do provide textural simplification, contrasting material and different emotional states as the "trio" normally does.  If one wants to have a more exclusive definition of trio that defines it as a form rather than just "a contrasting section in a large ternary design", they are still basically analogues of the trio, the same way the main/a sections are analogues to the scherzo despite not following the traditional binary form in the slightest. I mean that's how I'd put things anyway, if I had to analyse these pieces, lol

[(poco) Sforzando]

The trios in all four scherzi are pretty clearly delineated I think, usually by texture (quasi-heterophonic melody in No. 1, chordal and hymnlike in Nos. 2 and 3, simple melody-and-accompaniment in No. 4, all four being textures not used elsewhere in the piece) and key (B major, A major, D-flat major/E major, G-sharp minor). I personally don't see the logic in saying they aren't there?

(The only 'spiritual successors' I can think of to the Chopin Scherzi, right now, are the Queen Mab scherzo from Roméo et Juliette and the scherzo from Mahler 5, which of course have none of Chopin's darkness and whatever but are structurally (and in terms of instrumental demands) very similar... the only 'spiritual predecessor' I can think of is Beethoven's Op. 59/1. For dark-hued, ultrapowerful scherzo movements in a similar emotional vein I suppose there's Brahms Piano Concerto 2 but it's only superficially similar imo)

I hear the "trios" in the scherzo as you do, and don't quite understand zamara's resistance to this line of thinking.

But I don't know what you mean by spiritual successor or predecessor - unless you're thinking primarily in structural terms. As for 59/1, that piece has been described both as being in sonata form and ABA, and though it's a long time since I've done an analysis, I don't think it truly fits either. One interesting point I've found is that the piece touches on 11 of the 12 possible tonal centers, the only exception being the usual subdominant. As for dark-hued ultrapowerful, there are also Mahler 7 and Bruckner 9.

Good to see a discussion moving on such a serious musical level, even when we disagree. Thanks to all.

[North Star]

As for dark-hued ultrapowerful, there are also Mahler 7 and Bruckner 9.

Sounds like Shostakovich 10 & 13 might fit that bill, too.

[Brian]

Good to see a discussion moving on such a serious musical level, even when we disagree. Thanks to all.

Indeed - I wish the whole composer board was as engrossing to read as this is.

[Madiel]

I don't see any "trio" in the Chopin Scherzi. Ternary form where it applies but not "trio" as much as a three part song would have a "trio" in the middle, that in fact the Scherzi, in particular, nos. 1 and 4 compare better to.

I really think you're overthinking this.

"Trios" hadn't had automatically had 3-part textures for a long time before Chopin came along. The etymology of the word doesn't automatically define its meaning.

And really, for my part all I said on this topic originally was that most of Chopin's scherzi were clearly in ternary form, in the same way that a menuet/trio or scherzo/trio is in ternary form. I'm honestly not sure if you understand what binary and ternary forms are, because you said something about them being binary and that's what I corrected. Ternary form is ABA, binary form is AB, and the scherzos are clearly ternary.

The difference is as simple as binary forms not having a full close at the end of the first section of music, and ternary forms having a full close at the end of the first section of music. Early binary forms led to sonata form (see Scarlatti's keyboard sonatas for example).

[Madiel]

If you don't believe me, believe the Chopin Institute, which happened to be the first result I spotted when Googling. If the official Polish government organisation dedicated to the composer thinks there's a "trio" involved, I'd say that's a pretty decent source.

http://en.chopin.nifc.pl/chopin/genre/detail/id/17

[Wakefield]

Indeed - I wish the whole composer board was as engrossing to read as this is.

Sometimes one man's heaven is another man's hell, isn't it?