The Power of Long Notes

Ida Vujović

Pedal points and drones are present in almost all musical genres and styles. Although they appear in a whole variety of ways, and can have very diverse effects, music analysis rarely pays attention to these differences. The reason is, perhaps, that there are no defined concepts that would provide vocabulary to both describe and understand the power of sustained notes. My first research question addresses the ‘working’ of pedals and drones: How can we explain the perceptual difference among instances of pedal tones and drones? In searching for the right perspective to tackle this question I have come to two concepts that inspired the further research. The first is the concept of expectation. It is mostly promoted by the writings of Leonard B. Meyer (in the more recent time it is researched and developed by others), which I take as conceptual frame. The second is the concept of interactions that defines and organizes the musical events. The inspiration for the latter came from the social studies. The two concepts are interrelated: the expectation is a product of interactions of musical elements, and the expectations are also involved in interactions, thereby influencing the perception and understanding of a musical piece. My following research questions are: Could the concept of musical expectation and the concept of interaction help explain the power of long notes? If yes, in which ways can these processes influence the perception of pedals and drones? In the process of research, I have concluded that there are several categories of pedals/drones that are not labeled in music theory but are recognizable by many music theorists and musicians. Pointing at these categories and defining them could provide us with more words in pedal/drone-vocabulary. On the other hand, in case these models are recognizable as such, they have the potential to engage in various interactions with the other musical events in the piece, influencing the listener’s understanding of it. From this perspective, it is relevant to examine them. The current research aims at pointing at a number of such models. To define them, I have used the concepts of expectations and interactions. Music analysis of the chosen models and a number of musical fragments are so presenting the practical application of my theoretical research.

Movable pedal

Chopin, Raindrop prelude, op.28, no.15

The very first premise related to concept pedal is that its pitch is sustained. When the identity of a pedal is primarily formed by its absolute of relative pitch, changing of the pitch implies the termination of the pedal. This is true of the harmonic pedals. Some other types of pedals are not primarily defined by their exact or relative pitch. In case the timbre or the rhythm of the pedal are the defining factors, change of its pitch might be less relevant. This situation is recognized in Chopin’s prelude op.28, no.15.

The pedal establishes itself in the first bars. Its pitch is the fifth in the key. Its rhythmic pattern is not constant, but it consists almost constantly out of unaccented notes. In comparison with the rhythm of the melody, we see that the pedal tone rarely sound at the moment the important melodic notes sound. It seems that the pedal tones are complementary with the other rhythmic events in the piece.

In its ‘exposition phase’, in the opening of the piece, the pedal is consonant, provides constant rhythmic pulsation (by sounding all the eighth notes that accompaniment does not), and the steady pitch. The first four bars get the consequent phrase and the pedal still shows the same properties. The listener understands this is an instance of Rhythmic pedal in the upper (accompanying) voices model.

In the first eight bars, everything is simple and transparent: the form, the harmony, and the melody. The middle section of the first part of the prelude (starting in m.9) starts on the dominant, and the pedal still remains what it was. We have entered the middle section knowing what kind of pedal this is. And that is crucial because this section is, compared to the first one, not simple; the attention of the listener is automatically focusing on the elements that change and the processes that should be understood.

The form gets blurred by the implications of the melody and the harmonic organization. The phrase begins on the dominant, but even more important, the melodic line inclines towards the Gb in m.10 (harmonic reasons) which puts weight on m.10. The result is that m.10 sounds as a beginning. Similar happens four bars later. The boundaries of the phrases in this section are blurred and the listener needs some mental capacity to understand the phrase. The harmonic rhythm is faster, and there are more bass notes to move the harmonic listening (see the blue arrows in the image). The key becomes instable, first due to the tonicizing of the subdominant, then tonicizing the minor V (or modulating to Ab minor), then with the series of ascending fifths, the key reaches Bb minor. After this point in m.15, everything stabilizes again. And so it stays until the opening theme returns in m.20.

The listener was focused on the dynamic events, attentively following the harmonic and the melodic plane. The pedal tone was out of the focus but it felt as if it did sound all the time: we have heard the expected rhythmic activity in the pedal-register. In m.20 the pedal is again clean and clear. But is it the same tone?

The answer is NO. We have modulated and the new pedal is F, again the fifth of the key. The pedal is modulated together with the rest of the music. Its pitch has changed but its identity hasn’t. It is the same pedal from m.1, only with different pitch. The pedal-model that we have recognized, has interacted with the perception of the unchanged pulsation, perception of the fast harmonic changes and the process of understanding the structure. A possible result is that the listener could have the feeling that the ‘raindrops’ are constantly falling: the raindrops, the same thing.

After realizing the small ternary form of the A part, B part is announced by the rhythmic pulsation of the same pedal. It is continued throughout the B part. In this section, the pedal has taken the full responsibility for the pulsation, as it is the only accompanying voice for some time. The key is changed into its minor variant, and the texture is a kind of inverted. In the first part, it was the low voice (although the bass occasionally sounded lower). In the second part, it is the top voice (the melody will occasionally sound higher (e.g., in m.36)).

In m.35 the pedal tone becomes doubled in the octave; this prepares the variation of the first phrase in m.36. In m.40 the doubled pedal moves a third up, to be again the fifth of the current chord. After four bars, it returns to the original position, to host the recapitulation of the first theme from B.

Although its pitch is not constantly Ab/G#, the rhythmic pedal of the prelude op.28, no.15 is recognizable throughout the piece. Its identity is the same, it is just the raindrops. It rains the whole day.

Tip

Tip

Movable pedal