The Cadenza As Parenthesis

Journal of Music Theory
The Cadenza as Parenthesis

An Analytic Approach
Matthew Bribitzer-Stull
Abstract Conventional wisdom holds that the cadenza is a musical parenthesis. Like linguistic parenthetical
remarks, cadenzas may be engaging, illuminating, and insightful, but they are not regarded as intrinsic to struc-
tural coherence. Perhaps for this reason, the topic has remained parenthetical in modern music theory discourse.
Despite the connotations this neglect implies, the cadenza tradition stands as one endowed with great musical
richness, worthy of further analytic investigation.
This article seeks to define the dual function of the cadenza. Specifically, the cadenza is heard simultaneously
as a local, harmonic event and as a global, formal event. On the local level, it may either prolong one harmony or
progress from one to another. On the global level, it can serve a variety of formal functions: highlighting salient
cadences; opening a space for virtuosic display; and developing, relating, and rehearing elements of the concerto
movement proper.
The cadenzas dual function grants it a potential far exceeding the simple characterization as parenthesis.
Skillfully composed cadenzas exploit the tension between local and global functions and can initiate subtle yet
profound rehearings of music outside cadenza spacerehearings that give us pause to reconsider both the
cadenza-as-parenthesis metaphor and the artificial boundaries we construct among composer, performer, and
analyst.
Introduction
conventional wisdom holds that the cadenza is a musical parenthesis.

Taken at face value, this generalization leads us to believe that cadenzashow-
ever engaging, illuminating, and insightful they might beare not intrinsic
to structural coherence. Perhaps because of this view, the topic has remained
parenthetical in modern music theory discourse: Cadenzas, long the prov-
ince of performers and musicologists, have rarely been studied in analytic
detail;1 for theorists, they have been relegated to the realm of footnotes and
1 Performers and musicologists studying cadenzas usually 1982, 297309; Quantz 1985, 17995; and Kollmann 1973,
follow one of two tracks: the history of the cadenza as a 2223, all of whom provide guidelines for writing cadenzas.
performance and compositional tradition (examples include While some authors do include rudimentary analyses of
Badura-Skoda, Drabkin, and Jones 2001; Wang 1997, 158; cadenza form, thematic content, and/or harmonic content,
and Isaacs 1986, 3941), or the question of stylistic authen- they rarely engage the larger context of the movement. See
ticity in selecting or writing a cadenza; the majority of this Schrade 1995, 5963; Wang 1997; Robbins 1991; Melkus
second-track research relies on eighteenth-century writ- 1991; and Matthews 1978.
ings to determine stylistic norms. Most often cited are Trk
Journal of Music Theory 50:2, Fall 2006

DOI 10.1215/00222909-2008-016 2009 by Yale University 211
Published by Duke University Press

212 J ou r n a l o f M u s ic T h e o r y
afterthoughts, their tonal structures and formal functions mentioned in pass-

ing, if at all.2 Despite the connotations this neglect implies, the cadenza tra-
dition stands as one endowed with great musical richness worthy of further
investigation.
Indeed, a monograph-length analytic study of the harmonic, thematic,
and formal components of the cadenza would hardly suffer for lack of new
ground to break. My task in the current context, however, must be more lim-
ited. In short, I begin with the following question: Is the parenthesis meta-
phor viable for tonal music, and how, precisely, does it apply to the cadenza?
To address this, I consider how the cadenza interacts within its movement
proper both as a local-level harmonic event and as a global-level formal event.
In so doing, I introduce a new analytical model that will ultimately serve to
elucidate nine tonal/formal cadenza types. Finally, I conclude the study with
a series of analytical vignettes designed to model a variety of tonal and formal
possibilities for the cadenza.
Musical parenthesis
Our musical discourse is rich with linguistic influences: we use such words as
phrase, statement, and sentence frequently; we hypothesize grammar
and syntax for common-practice music; we engage semiotics to understand
musical meaning; and we often refer to music itself as a languagea mode
of expression or even communication.3 Of course, the mapping between lan-
guage and music is hardly isomorphic. While linguistic concepts that reside
in the realm of pure sound (phonology) and performance (rhetoric) have
been commandeered with relative ease by music scholars, the application of
linguistic notions of structure (syntax or grammar) and meaning (semantics)
to music has proved more problematic.4
2 Only three articles concerning tonal structure focus on the 3 For a cursory overview, see Sloboda 1990, which sketches
cadenza: Swain 1988, which treats Mozarts techniques for out musics phonological, syntactic, and semantic com-
reinforcing V , and Drabkin 1996 and 1998, which provide a ponents and their analogies to language, in particular, the
quick look at some tonal structures within Mozarts piano semantics of meaning-filled association with coincidental
cadenzas. Among recent scholars of form, Charles Rosen musical experience.
(1980) does not mention cadenzas as a formal unit at all;
4 For some different perspectives on these issues, see Ler-
Douglass Green (1975, 242) and William Caplin (1998, 243
dahl and Jackendoff 1983, Swain 1995, Dempster 1998, and
and 251) mention only that the cadenza interrupts the final
Patel 2003.
ritornello; and James Hepokoski and Warren Darcy (2006
6002) make only brief mention of the cadenza, arguing
that it lies outside of the formal space in the movement
of which it is a part. Caplin (1998, 281 n. 51) admits that a
form-functional study of the cadenza remains to be done.
One such exhaustive study, Robert Forster 1992 (153406),
does treat formal implications of cadenzas, but only those
of Mozart and Beethoven.

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 213
Linguistic metaphors also permeate our musical discourse.5 Many of

us who teach undergraduate theory, for instance, illustrate cadential func-
tions for our students by likening them unto punctuation (a period for the
perfect authentic cadence, a question mark for the half cadence, etc.).6 We
also speak of musical voicesvoices narrating, voices dialoging, and tone of
voice. Despite musics often-suggestive similarity to language, however, we
must guard against thoughtless application of linguistic terminology to musi-
cal contexts. Hence, my first task is to better understand the linguistic phe-
nomenon of parenthesis and then to examine the contexts in which we might
understand its operation in tonal music.
In short, a parenthetical phrase in language constitutes a nonessential
insertion. Or, more fully, the function of parentheses is to present that [paren-
thesized] element as extraneous to a minimal interpretation of the text, as
inessential material that can be omitted without affecting the well-formedness
and without any serious loss of information. They provide an elaboration,
illustration, refinement of, or comment on, the content of the accompanying
text (Huddleston and Pullum 2002, 1748).7 In the context in which we are
considering them, parentheses also have other notable features: They come
in pairs, they can include various type of elements from inflectional suffixes
to complete paragraphs, and they can be either integrable (i.e., replaced with
commas without affecting the meaning of the sentence, like this parentheti-
cal) or nonintegrable. By convention, parentheses do not begin sentences,
and nested parentheses are avoided as a matter of clarity. Finally, parentheses
bear a functional similarity to other forms of punctuationdashes or delim-
iting commas, for instancethat often imply less insulation from the main
thought (see Figure 1).8
Of course, the written parentheses are simply a stand-in for the perfor-
mance markerusually a pause or change of tonethat indicates an inser-
tion in spoken language. Despite both the written and spoken indicators, it
is the setting apart, the context in which the insertion is made, that makes it
parenthetical; punctuation and rhetoric exist simply for clarity. In context, the
parenthetical must invoke a sense of interruptiona statement related, but
tangential, to the point at hand is being added to an otherwise focused train of
5 For one, see Mak 2003, which discusses musical para 6 Note that this treatment derives from a similar eighteenth-
taxis. Heinrich Schenker (1979) is perhaps responsible for century usage. See Caplin 2004, 1034, which mentions
suggesting many such musical metaphors in his oft-cited some of the problems with the cadence-as-punctuation
passage from Die freie Satz: In the art of music, as in life, metaphor.
motion toward the goal encounters obstacles, reverses, dis-
7 This quotation and the material that follows was culled
appointments, and involves great distances, detours, expan-
from Huddleston and Pullum 2002, 174851.
sions, interpolations, and, in short, retardations of all kinds.
Therein lies the source of all artistic delaying, from which 8 A point of interest: There are languages that embody par-
the creative mind can derive content that is ever new (5). enthetical rhetoric in their syntax. Mbum, a language of the
One can even find parentheses marked on some of Schen- Niger-Congo family spoken in Cameroon, for instance, uses
kers graphic analyses (see, e.g., Example 2 in this article). bracketed relative clauses whose insertion point and end
point are marked by delimiting words.

A variety of ways in which written English indicates an insertion are

underlined below.
The Wagner tuba (an instrument first crafted in 1875 by Georg

Ottenheimer for Wagners Ring orchestra) is notoriously
difficult to play in tune.
The Wagner tubathat wild beast of the orchestrais

notoriously difficult to play in tune.
The Wagner tuba, which is on loan from the Chicago Symphony

Orchestra, is notoriously difficult to play in tune.
(Cf. The Wagner tuba that is on loan from the Chicago
Symphony Orchestra is notoriously difficult to play in tune, a
statement without an insertion.)
Figure 1. Insertions in language
thought. And, the flow of information on either side of the parenthesis must
continue with semantic clarity and syntactic correctness.
This cursory definition of parenthesis in language is enough to suggest a
number of musical parallels.9 Most musicians will be able to recall pieces that
include points of contrast or digression in which one musical thought seem-
ingly interrupts another. Moreover, we all recognize parenthetical rhetoric
in music: rough changes in texture, register, harmony, or thematic content;
linear-intervallic or hypermetric patterns broken off and later resumed; and
the fermata before a cadenza, to name but a few. The sense of insertion is most
clear when new material appears within a musical statement previously heard.
See, for instance, Example 1, in which Mozarts four-bar antecedent phrase
is followed by a parallel six-bar consequent. Given our expectation that the
consequent will mimic the antecedent with an expansion of tonic in the first
three bars leading to a cadence in the fourth, mm. 78 (the third and fourth
bars of the consequent phrase) come as something of a surpriserather than
moving toward the expected cadence, they continue to prolong tonic. Both
the hypermetric interruption and sense of harmonic stasis in comparison to
the antecedent phrase suggest a viable hearing of these measures as paren-
thetical. Although they certainly add something to the music, removing them
does not damage the harmonic-contrapuntal syntax. To paraphrase the paren-
thesis definition, these measures present material extraneous to a minimal
interpretation of Mozarts text, material that can be omitted without affecting
its well-formedness and without any serious loss of information (although not
9 We might extend our punctuation metaphor further: the between musical parentheses and musical quotation
inserted, self-quoted themes in the finale of Mozarts Don marks. See Hull 1998 (141) for a discussion of Brahmss
Giovanni or Strausss Ein Heldenleben, for example, require use of parenthetical passages to set off allusions to other
that we make a distinction in our contextual interruptions composers music.

JMT 50:2 Job 149-2 Bribitzer-Stull Example 1

Allegro

.0
! \ 1 2 3 4 [1
.
0
( )
6

! 2 3 4
Example 1. Mozart, Piano Sonata in C major, K. 279, III, mm. 110
without losing a sense of Mozartean elegance). That is, mm. 78 provide an

elaboration of the syntax and content of the accompanying text.
Of course, common-practice tonal music contains so many familiar pat-
terns that the suggestion of a parenthetical insertion is not dependent upon a
repeated musical statement. The interruption of intervening material between
members of a stock harmonic progression (e.g., V moving to I) functions
almost as well. Such an example comes to us from Heinrich Schenkers writ-
ings (see Example 2).10 This music occurs in the rondo finale of Beethovens
Sonata in E major, op. 7. In m. 63, unexpected sfz octaves on B lead to a rea-
sonable goal, the relative C minor. In m. 154, the B octaves return, but instead
of passing to C, they pause, creating the rhetorical space to set up a parentheti-
cal entrance of the rondo theme in E major. Schenkers prose (1979, 101)
refers to this moment as a dreamlike digression into E major and states that
it is like an awakening when we return to V of the tonic E major.11 In this
case, the expansion of the dominant from V (strongly suggested by the octave
Bs) to V is interruptedan interruption signaled by the fermatas pause
and the altered tone of voice caused by the disjunctions in dynamics and
register. The open parenthesis drops to a pianissimo dynamic and features
the middle-low register, making the close parenthesis clearly audible by the
accented leap back up to 4 (A) in the upper register.
Likewise, the interruption of familiar formal paradigms may also sug-
gest parenthetical insertion. In Example 3, the sonata-form juncture between
transition and second tonal area in Schuberts A-minor allegro for piano, four
10 Other authors also engage the notion of musical paren- 11 Note that in Example 2, the Roman numeral I in the
theses suggested by tonal structure. See Laufer 1985; Roth- example is misplaced an eighth note early.
stein 1989, passim (which couples tonal and hypermetric
factors in an analysis of musical parentheses); Brown 1993,
136; and Goldenberg 2001 (which focuses on enharmonic
reinterpretation).

216
Example 2. Harmonic parenthesis suggested by tonal digression: Beethoven, Sonata op. 7, IV (Schenker 1979)
J ou r n a l o f M u s ic T h e o r y


P T S K
1 37 81 89 138 149 152 199 200
5 Medial Caesura 4 3
()

! 5

V I
V
C: I
a: i III
Example 3. Musical parenthesis by formal digression: Schubert four-

hand allegro in A minor, op. 144 Lebensstrme, exposition
hands, op. 144, Lebensstrme, is broached by an insertion.12 The transition

sets up period-with-dissolving-consequent formal rhetoric, and the downbeat
of bar 81 achieves a medial caesura on the dominant.13 Were this downbeat to
be followed by the customary rest, the C-major music starting in m. 138 would
sound perfectly appropriate beginning in the next measure, given the norms
of minor-mode sonata form in the early nineteenth century. The medial cae-
sura in bar 81, however, is filledor stretched might be a better word
with the enharmonic reinterpretation of G to A. The sense of melody is sus-
pended (the melodic void creating the necessary sense of a pause or a space
to mark an insertion) in favor of the accompaniment pattern to the upcoming
m. 89 theme in A. This tonal-thematic digression lasts for some fifty measures
until C, as upper third of A (bar 138) arrives, leading through a descending
fifths sequence to the expected second tonal area in the mediant. Thus, the
dreamlike A can be heard as a parenthetical insertion that interrupts the
middleground motion from the A minor tonic to the C major mediant, delay-
ing the second tonal area.
The analytic readings above, despite their merits, are not without dif-
ficulties. First, they seem to suggest that any interruption or discontinuity is
grounds for a rhetorical parenthesis. To be fair, this rhetorical disjunction
should be present at both the beginning and the end of the insertion, just as
language pairs the open and close parentheses. Thus, the resumption of musi-
cal syntax and semantics after the interruption should be marked as strenu-
ously as the original interruption itself, a requirement music analysis has not
12 The reading presented by this analysis was suggested by 13 Hepokoski and Darcy 2006 (93116) defines a variety of
remarks Janet Schmalfeldt made in a paper on music that transitional structures, including the period with dissolving
turns inward (see Schmalfeldt 2002). consequent (1012). See also Hepokoski and Darcy 1997
for a detailed discussion of the medial caesura. The reader
should note that my use of these concepts does not imply
that all form analysis within this study derives from Hepoko-
ski and Darcy.


84

!
\ [

`
92

!

Example 4. Invertible counterpoint in the recapitulation to Mozart, Piano Sonata in C major,

K. 279, III, mm. 8496
always adhered to.14 While we can all recall speeches in which the speaker
embarks upon a tangent or insertion but never returns to the original train
of thoughtsomething possible in music, too (see the interruption between
mm. 9798ff. in Haydns Piano Sonata no. 46 in A major), such digressions
are more appropriate (and even expected) in improvisation than in a finished
score. Despite this suggestion that the strict hierarchy of thought demanded
by the correct use of parenthetical insertions is not native to extemporaneous
human cognition, it is something we demand of written prose and, in many
cases, written music.
Second, and more troubling, events within the parenthetical statements
in Examples 13 have connections outside the parentheses. In Example 1, the
parenthetical measures return at the opening of the recapitulation, although
here the consequent phrase begins with the voices inverted (see Example 4).
The first of the parenthetical measures reappears in inversion (they, too,
work in double invertible counterpoint), although it is the responsibility of
the second parenthetical measure to reinvert the two lines back to their
original placement. Thus, the parenthesis in the recapitulation cannot simply
be omitted without damaging the structure of the passage. Likewise, in Exam-
ple 2, we see a dashed slur pointing to an enharmonic G/A connection in
Schenkers analysis. This slur implies that the material within the parenthesis
is perhaps more intimately connected with the tonal structure of the music
14 One might criticize William Rothsteins (among others) textural, or phrase rhythmic disjunction. The emphasis on
otherwise elegant insertions mentioned above (note 10) for open parentheses extends to Whitmore 1991 (15), which
their lack of close parentheses. See, for instance, Rothstein asserts that the opening of a cadenza is a more important
1989 (8889, example 3.18), in which the sense of disjunc- articulation than the ending since the opening formula
tion is strong for the open parenthesis while the close paren- establishes its status as insertion.
thesis evokes little sense of rhetorical, harmonic, registral,

that follows than would be usual for the analogous material inside and after a
linguistic parenthesis. Finally, the recapitulation of the A parenthesis into
F major in the Schubert allegro (Example 3) suggests that the insertion is not
inessential to the form; that it, too, needs to be brought into relation with
tonic to fulfill the sonata principle.
These obstacles to the application of a musical parenthesis metaphor
do not demand the rejection of metaphoric languageafter all, the concept
of musical parenthesis has persisted precisely because of its analytic valueso
much as caution us in applying cross-disciplinary terminology. Despite numer-
ous similarities between music and language, my brief analyses have suggested
that the concept of parenthesis, when applied to music, raises some unan-
swered questions: What constitutes a musical analog to the written parenthesis
punctuation marks? Are both opening and closing disjunctions mandatory
for parenthesis to operate in a musical context? Does the material in a musi-
cal parenthesis relate more strongly to that which lies outside it than would
be normative in a linguistic insertion? Bearing these questions in mind, let
us turn to the cadenzathe practice in tonal music most widely believed to
exemplify parenthesis.
In speech, a distinction exists between rhetorical insertionsthose
achieved through performance indications such as a pause or altered tone
of voiceand announced insertions, in which speakers explicitly state their
intentions (e.g., As an aside, allow me to mention...). The cadenzas strong
candidacy for consideration as a musical parenthesis is because it, of all con-
structions in tonal music, most closely approximates the announced inser-
tion. Reinforced by musical convention, the fermata chord, coupled with the
onset of a passage lacking orchestral accompaniment and hypermetric regu-
larity,15 in effect announces the opening of the stereotypical cadenza within
or just before the final ritornello of a concerto movement, ostensibly answer-
ing the question of what constitutes a musical analogy to the written parenthe-
sis punctuation. Likewise, the resolution of the to a root-position dominant
(seventh), often embellished by a melodic trill on 2 or 7 accompanied by the
return of the orchestra and a clear hypermeter, delimit its end (Now, back
to my main point...).16 Note that the sense of rhetorical pause is still pres-
ent both at the beginning (when the orchestra retards into and pauses at the
fermata chord) and at the end (when the local harmonic motion freezes
on V under the prolonged melodic trill). Additionally, our sense of harmony
informs the parenthetical hearing, too, as we imagine the cadenza occurring
over a pedal dominant that may be unplayed, but not unheard.17 Within
15 Rothstein 1989 (279) describes the cadenza as a sort of 17 This interpretation of the cadenza has been around since
hypermeter-less music. at least the eighteenth century. See Kollmann 1973 (23 and
plate 10), in which the figured bass presumes that a bass 5
16 Note that the V that resolves the opening often
is heard throughout the cadenza.
includes a dominant seventh. The figures for this resolu-
tion chord are used for simplicitys sake and are not intended
to deny the presence of a chordal seventh.

the parenthetical space delimited by this conventional musical rhetoric, we

expect the soloist to provide passage work and some melodic elaboration.
Moreover, we expect the content of this musical parenthesis to change from
performance to performance, being perhaps improvised upon the spot.
As any experienced musician knows, however, many cadenzas do not
conform to the prototype sketched out above. Some open with the dominant
in root position (Mendelssohns Violin Concerto in D minor, III), a predomi-
nant harmony (Griegs and Schumanns piano concertos), or another har-
mony (the cadenza from Rachmaninovs Piano Concerto in F minor, I, opens
with an applied ii /iv). Others fail to expand V, preferring a prolongation
of tonic (Dvoraks Quasi Cadenza in the Cello Concerto, II, moves from I
to vi), a progression into V or I (Schumanns Introduction and Allegro in D
minor), or another tonal formula altogether (the first and last harmonies of
Schumanns Violin Fantasy cadenza are IV, arguing, at least rhetorically, for
a prolongation of the predominant). There are cadenzas that foreshadow
new material rather than recalling old (Coplands Clarinet Concerto). There
are cadenzas in chamber music (Mozarts Quintet for Piano and Winds in E
major, K. 452, III), solo sonatas (Beethovens Sonata in C major, op. 2/3, I),
symphonies (Beethovens Symphony in C minor, I), and program music (the
violin solos in Rimsky-Korsakovs Scheherazade). There are cadenzas that open
movements (Liszts Piano Concerto in E major, I), cadenzas that mark the
end of the development (Mendelssohns Violin Concerto in E minor, I), and
cadenzas in non-sonata forms (Rachmaninovs Piano Concerto in C minor, II).
There are accompanied cadenzas (Mozarts Piano Concerto in C major, K.503,
III), cadenzas quasi fantasia (Brahms, Piano Concerto in D minor, III), and
cadenzas titled in parentheses (the first cadenza in Liszts Piano Concerto in A
major). There are concertos whose first movements contain multiple cadenzas
(Tchaikovskys Piano Concerto in B minor) and concertos whose first move-
ments contain no cadenzas (Mozarts Clarinet Concerto). There are even con-
certo movements with cadenzas for members of the orchestra (Tchaikovskys
Piano Concerto in G major, II, contains cadenzas for violin and cello).
With all of these exceptional cases, the cadenzas have been written into
the scorea matter either of expediency (when there is more than one solo-
ist, though even here there are exceptions, as in the three cadenzas to be
improvised in Mozarts Concerto for Flute and Harp in C major, K. 299) or of
compositional control. That composers such as Beethoven grew increasingly
concerned with the content of the cadenza proper and resorted to writing it
out suggests that the cadenza material was not parenthetical (that is, inessen-
tial) to the formal and/or tonal structure.18 As Examples 2 and 3 suggested,
18 See Kramer 1991 (130) for a discussion of Beethovens taste, wrote out their cadenzas. Whitmore 1991 notes that
redefinition of the performers voice in the cadenza. Badura- after Beethovens Emperor Concerto, the composer never
Skoda, Drabkin, and Jones 2001 (784) notes that as early wrote another cadenza (or concerto), and this concerto had
as Caccini (1589), composers, unsure of performers good a written-out cadenza with instructions to the performer not

there may be a fundamental distinction between two types of insertionthose

that are truly inessential, lacking long-range connections to outside music,
and those whose absence would damage the tonal or formal cohesion of the
movement proper. Thus, our most important task in analyzing a cadenza is to
ask whether it is essential or inessential in two contexts: on the local level for
bridging the gap between two vertical sonorities (most usually V and V or V
and I) and on the global level of the musical form in which it occurs.
The cadenza as tonal parenthesis
Let us turn first to the local-level, harmonic consideration of the prototypi-

cal cadenzas V formula. In many cadenzas, it is clear that passage work
merely elaborates the cadential , adding nothing in the way of tonal structure
(see Example 5a). Even the appearance of an apparent succession of tonic
and dominant(-seventh) chords can be explained as upper-voice elaborations
of the dominant above an imagined pedal 5a common enough pattern
in tonal music (see Example 5b). More extended cadenzas, however, often
exhibit their own tonal structure, a matter alluded to by Schenker (see Exam-
ple 6). Here, Schenker (1979) illustrates how a brief cadenza composes out
the dominant. His analytic commentary on this example proves valuable for
our present discussion: Even the so-called elaborated cadenza (at a fermata)
has a structure of its own....In order to gain an understanding of such a pas-
sage and its bass, it is necessary temporarily to disregard the bass tone which
underlies the cadenza, usually V (88). Schenker suggests that the cadenza
and the ensuing cadence comprise a complete harmonic motion from tonic
through a predominant to dominant and back to tonic. This reading gives
us serious reason to question the linguistic metaphor. While parenthetical
remarks in language may be complete statements, they are rarely both com-
plete statements and statements that continue the exact flow of thought pre-
ceding the parenthesis (see Figure 2). Here the parenthetical statement could
stand on its own, but it also continues, with syntactic correctness, the flow of
thought before the parenthesis. There is a sense of ambiguity in this example
that we value in music but that we find awkward in language.
Undeniably, it is the very nature of the sonority that provides for this
rich ambiguity in music, because many of its functions rely upon conceiving of
it as a second-inversion triadarguably the most flexible and least understood
of all triadic positions. In Example 6, Schenker himself implies that the open-
ing is dissonant on the global level, while being a consonant tonic within
the cadenza proper. But what of the many cadenzas in which the bass, and
to add his or her own, suggesting that this was the result of
a crisis in Beethovens compositional style between impro-
visatory freedom and greater compositional control (181).
See also Mies 1970 on this topic.

JMT 50:2 Job 149-2 Bribitzer-Stull Example 5a

(a)
q
232 q

!

[\
q

w
` q

l l u
!

u
\

u u
JMT 50:2 w
Job 149-2 Bribitzer-Stull Example 5b
(b)
(Allegretto)
54 DONNA ELVIRA
Ma tra - di - ta

! orchestral reduction

7 6 5 6 7
B : V
4 3 4

57

e ab - ban - do - na - ta,

7 6
6
4 4
5
Example 5. The elaborated 64 chord. (a) Cadenza to Beethovens Piano Sonata in C major, op.
2/3, mm. 23234. (b) Mi trad, from Mozarts Don Giovanni, mm. 5459

Example 6. The cadenza as parenthesis: an example from Schenker (1979)

The Wagner tuba is the instrument (that may be disagreeable to

some listeners) that fills out the tonal palette of late-nineteenth-
century brass sections.
Cf. The Wagner tuba is the instrument that fills out the tonal
palette of latenineteenth-century brass sections. That may be
disagreeable to some l isteners.
The thats in the first sentence are a stand-in for the V that serves both as a
lead-in to the cadenza and part of the orchestras V - formula. In the
second, the thats serve as lead-ins to two dependent clauses.
Figure 2. Linguistic parentheticals that mimic cadenzas
therefore the harmony, explicitly changes between the fermata and the con-
cluding VI gesture? Many of Mozarts own cadenzas to his piano concertos,
for instance, include VI, V/V, V 7, and I, among other harmonies, between the
fermata and the final VI cadence. While the cadenzas origins as an elabo-
rated melodic second scale degree argue, at least historically, that these inter-
vening harmonies are decorative in nature, we must ask ourselves whether it
is the fermata chord, the V chord, or something else that is actually being
prolonged in these extended cadenzas.19 That is, if we are to continue using
the parenthetical metaphor for the cadenza, we must reconcile our concepts
of prolongation and insertion.
The concept of prolongation has enjoyed detailed and, at times, con-
tentious treatment in the music theory literature over the past half century.20
While a review of that literature lies outside the scope of this article, most
scholars agree that it is impossible to prolong a dissonance in the context of
functionally tonal music.21 And therein lies our difficulty with prolonging the
cadenzas opening . Rhetorically, the stereotypical cadenza opening is set up
as a dissonant cadential a hearing supported by the predominant chords
that usually precede it. Moreover, rhetoric would have us hear the upper voices
of the resolving at the end of the cadenza. Many cadenzas tonal structures,
however, tell a different story. The opening , for instance, often resolves to
root-position dominant, and then to tonic within the cadenza itself. The open-
19 Badura-Skoda, Drabkin, and Jones 2001 (783) tracesthe 20 For an introduction to this topic, see Kielian-Gilbert 2003,
growth of the cadenza back to the vocal tradition of orna- Larson 1997, Straus 1987, and Morgan 1976.
menting the penultimate note of an ending (as early as the
21 V 7 may be an exception to the prohibition against pro-
thirteenth century). Whitmore 1991 (6) qualifies Johann Joa
longing dissonances (see Clark 1982). If so, we understand
chim Quantzs statement that cadenzas occur on the pen-
the seventh of V 7 as an essential dissonance in Kinbergers
ultimate note of the bass. While this is true in much cham-
sense, in distinction to the upper voices of V , which are
ber and solo piano music, in concertos it usually occurs on
nonessential dissonances.
the penultimate note of the solo section (followed by a ritor-
nello). Rothstein 1989 (67) marks the cadenza as an extreme
example of Riemanns Stillstand auf der Penultima.

ing of Mozarts cadenza to the first movement of his Piano Concerto in B

major, K. 450, follows just such a progression in its first five bars.22 Alternately,
the opening can be reinterpreted by the cadenza, belying its preparation as
a V .23 The cadenza from Beethovens C-minor piano concerto, for example,
reinterprets the opening of the cadenza as a passing , expanding the Gr+6
chord.24 Even when the true arrives in m. 420, it turns out to serve a tonic
function, arpeggiating through I.25
Likewise, the closing dominant may be subverted in a number of ways.
Example 7, from Mozarts unfinished Concert Rondo for Horn and Orchestra
in E major, K. 371, demonstrates the stereotypical concluding trill on 2 resolv-
ing deceptively.26 Between the two fermatas in the score, the soloist inserts the
cadenza material. The expected tonic after the second fermata, however, is
replaced with a diminished-seventh chord that serves to prolong the dominant,
harmonizing one of the ascending passing tones in the horn line from concert
C to E (bracketed in the example). This rising third from 2 to 4 parallels the
many rising thirds inherent to the main rondo theme (of which the bracketed
1 to 3 is just onethe one to which the horns 2 and 4 resolve). By prolonging
the cadenzas final dominant in this fashion, Mozart enables the orchestra to
enter before the tonic harmony (at Allegro) is achieved, while simultaneously
working in a melodic parallelism to the movements main theme.27
These examples point to an unsettling juxtaposition, a harmonic sleight-
of-hand, in which the -to- motion is rhetorically understood to exist at a tonal
level deeper than the cadenza that elaborates it, but in which the framing
sonorities connect syntactically across the boundaries of the orchestral ritor-
nello and the cadenza, in effect blurring the edges of our supposed parenthet-
ical insertion.28 This may explain why even some of the best work on chords
22 Mozarts cadenza to K. 413 also resolves the to a root- the solo part only. For other examples that convert the open-
position tonic immediately. ing chord to a root-position tonic, see Mozarts cadenzas to
K.415, I, and K. 595, I.
23 Beach 1990b presents good examples of chords that
initially strike the ear as being cadential s but, after further 26 See also Mozarts cadenza to K. 414, III.
examination, actually function as passing or arpeggiated s.
27 Mozarts example here is but one of many similar pas-
24 I thank William Rothstein for pointing me toward this sages in the literature that features the orchestras entrance
example. An alternate reading might hear the chords above before the cadenzas VI harmonic formula is complete.
the As and Fs in the bass as expanding the dominant by Whitmore 1991 cites representative examples from the first
neighbor motion. I hear the Gr+6 chord in bar 412 as a hyper- movement of Beethovens piano concertos in C minor and G
metric downbeat, as is the V chord in bar 416. Thus, it does major. See also Beethovens cadenza for his Piano Concerto
not feel like the V really arrives until bar 416. This arrival is in B major, I, in which the does not resolve at the end.
then undercut by the opening of the cadenza.
28 This has confused numerous writers on the topic of the
25 Swain 1988 (5758) generalizes that while Mozarts cadenzas tonal structure. See, for instance, Mary Robbins
cadenzas tend to prolong the cadential and remain struc- (1992), who hedges her bets, noting the cadenzas dual
turally parenthetical, Beethovens often prolong the tonic role of emphasizing tonic and sustaining the tension of the
and take part in the movements tonal structure. Even the V (24), and argues that Vs within the cadenza do not
simple V I tonal plan in the obligatory cadenza in the resolve the orchestras V although the orchestras V can
first movement of Beethovens Emperor Concerto argues resolve the pianos V (40).
for its structural importance in that the opening resolves in

` 777777777777777777
Solo
q
q ` 7777777 (P)

Solo

$ h h h h h q q
h
Vn. ! [

q q
\
h
h

[ \
Va.
q q

%
Vc.
[ V64 V7 vii7/VI
V
q q
Adagio. Allegro.
l
Solo

$ q q

! [
q
\
q
Vn.

\
[
q
q
% 6
Vc.
V4 [7 \
V
`

Solo
l
Example 7. Cadenza with deformed ending: Mozarts Concert Rondo for Horn and Orchestra
in E major, K. 371 (orchestration left incomplete at the time of Mozarts death)

remains inconclusive. In a series of articles published in this journal, David

Beach first stated (1967, 2324) that the cadential can be prolonged (as in a
concerto cadenza).29 Later, however, he preferred the term extension rather
than prolongation and suggested that dissonant melodic notes in a cadential
cannot be prolonged by consonances (1990a, 98).30 Edward Aldwell and Carl
Schachter make similar statements in their harmony textbook (2003). Under
headings titled Expanding the Cadential and Interpolations between the
and Its Resolution, they remark that the can be expanded (when the bass
arpeggiates through the chord, e.g.) or that the bass (not the upper voices)
can be prolonged (31520).31 They also describe the entirety of the cadenza
as an expansion of the V .
There is no question that without the intervening solo material, the
V of the cadenza would function harmonically like any other cadential .
But omitting the solo material from between the V and V would be unthink-
able in performance because, rhetorically, the setup of the fermata demands
something more. Once the cadenza begins, it becomes part of the tonal struc-
ture of the movement. We could hardly call it a separate Satzit is dependent
upon the music surrounding it for its existence. And, for that reason (though
it might be convenient), it is hopelessly naive to consider the cadenza a blank
check, a gap to be filled with anything under the unconditional guarantee
that the orchestras V will be prolonged until the V at the cadenzas conclu-
sion. While we can certainly point to examples in which the V is extended
in time (without any change of harmony) or in which another harmony is
interpolated between V and its resolution to V , such examples ultimately
prolong the root-position dominant, not the cadential . The upper voices of
the chord are, after all, dissonant, which is why analysts attach the Roman
numeral V, rather than I, to this chord. But time and again, we are presented
with cadenzas in which the V clearly resolves to V and I within the cadenza;
cadenzas in which stable thematic presentations, complete harmonic progres-
sions, and even miniature formal types appear; and cadenzas that are longer
than many stand-alone binary pieces. And therein lies our dilemma. We are
29 Others have agreed with him. See Swain 1988 (3644), extension and prolongation and that today he would
which lists the techniques Mozart uses for prolonging agree that the V cannot be prolonged as a harmony due to
V and states that the rarity of the principal theme at the the dissonance of the upper voices.
opening of the cadenza is due to its association with tonic sta-
31 In their example from Brahmss German Requiem,
bility (40); Friedman 1989, which says that all of Beethovens
Aldwell and Schachter (317) make no mention of the upper
cadenzas (except for op. 19) prolong the cadential six-four
voices. Rather than arguing that the bass of the chord is
(273) but avoid strong tonics or dominants until the end;
prolonged through double neighbor motion (CDBC), it
and Drabkin 1996 (165), which states that the cadenza com-
might make more sense to treat the first chord as arising
poses out, or prolongs, the V progression.
from a bass neighboring (DCD) or, even better, passing
30 Beach here refers to the chord as being extended (DCB) motion, thus achieving the dominant (V ) only
(rather than prolonged) and admits that it can have pre- upon the final C (m. 161). Compare Beach 1990b (28485),
liminary resolutions. In a personal communication with the which cites an example in which a s top note (dissonance)
author, Beach confided that at the time of his 1967 article he cannot be prolonged by a consonance.
had not thought through the semantic differences between

torn because convention and rhetoric tell us that this music doesnt matter,
that it is not truly part of the movement proper, and yet we hear it as part of the
movement proper. This is precisely what is so disturbing about the cadenza,
for if we admit to its legitimacy, we must also admit that the performer is entrusted,
in part, with the tonal structure of the movement.
Given this apparent conflict in evidence, it is not surprising that a survey
of the scholarly literature on cadenzas turns up unequivocal statements that
the cadenza both is and is not a component of tonal structure.32 Thus, any
responsible cadenza analysis should address both the tonal structure of the
cadenza proper and its interaction with the tonal structure of the movement
in which it appears. For the former, the approach taken in this study will
be Schenkerian graphic analysis. While Schenkerian analysis, like all analytic
methods, has its weaknesses, no other method for illustrating the interaction
of harmony and counterpoint in functional tonality suggests itself in this con-
text. Elements left unarticulated by Schenkerian analysis (e.g., thematic con-
tent or formal function) I take up in the next section of this article.
To illustrate my analytic model for the second considerationthe inter-
action of the cadenza with the tonal structure of the movement properlet
us turn to three brief analyses. The first, Example 8, presents an analysis of
Mozarts cadenza to the first movement of his Piano Concerto in B major,
K.450. The top portion is a Schenkerian graphic analysis that illustrates how
the dominant Stufe is prolonged throughout the cadenza.33 The bottom por-
tion is a simplistic overview of the cadenza. The opening and closing har-
monies of the cadenza are marked in brackets. Between these two framing
sonorities, a slur indicates the prolongation of one Stufe, the dominant.
Finally, the significant tonic Stufe from our Schenkerian analysis is appended
above and between the brackets to show how the cadenzas prolongation is
elaboratedin this case, a tonic harmony functions as an insertion between
the cadential and the dominant seventh. This analytic overview is typical of
32 Robbins 1992 (72) states that the symmetry of the con- to continually hear tonic arrivals as unstable chords attenu-
certo movement is dependent harmonically and proportion- ates the longer the cadenza persists and the more forcefully
ally on the cadenza; Swain 1988 (58) asserts that cadenzas these tonic arrivals are articulated. In this cadenza, I believe
by Mozart and Beethoven, although written after the works the repeated tonic arrivals, the low register of the tonic root,
they are intended for, are constructed with these specific and the length of the cadenza overbalance the conceptual
works structure in mind; and Matthews 1978 (72526) says dominant pedal. Note that I is still subservient to V, however,
the cadenza is a structural necessity. On the other hand, as an interpolationthe dominant pedal analysis is not nec-
Drabkin 1996 (164) states that Mozarts cadenzas tonal essary to assert the prolongation of V.
structures are independent of the movements in which A second possibility is hearing a prolongation of V 7 (from
they appear. the second sonority of the analysis to the final sonority).
While the prolongation of V is not in question, the timing of
33 There are at least two viable alternatives to the analytic
the resolution of the s upper voices is open to question.
reading presented here. The first, assuming that the root- I read the first V 7
Because of the persistence of melodic 3,
position tonic chords throughout the analysis are still mani-
here as a more surface-level lead-in to the prolonged tonic,
festations of the cadential , requires hearing an imagined
just as the predominant sonorities at the end are more
pedal dominant below the bass throughout the cadenza.
surface-level connective tissue back to V.
Certainly, imagining such a tone is a reasonable analytic
point of departure, although one might argue that our ability

B : V64 7
I I V7
( V64 V7 )
Example 8. Tonal analysis of Mozarts cadenza to his Piano Concerto in B major, K. 450, I
cadenzas whose content can be understood as tonally parenthetical and whose

boundary harmonies present no real problems. Other possibilities abound, of
course, requiring some additions to the analytic model.
As we saw earlier in the cadenza to Mozarts Concert Rondo for Horn and
Orchestra in E major, K. 371 (Example 7), the exact boundary of the cadenza
may be difficult to discern. Example 9 presents a transcription of hornist
Anthony Halsteads cadenza to this movement and the slur-and-brackettype
analytic overview. (Due to the brevity and simplicity of the cadenza, a Schen-
kerian analysis is hardly necessary.) Again, the cadenza is clearly parenthetical
to the movements tonal structure and serves to prolong the dominant with
alternating upper voices above an assumed pedal 5.
But the curly brackets
above the orchestral series of harmonies that follow the second fermata in
Example 9 indicate that there is a range of possibilities for the ending bound-
ary point of the cadenzathe disjunction between harmonic resolution and
orchestral reentry leave some doubt in our minds as to when, precisely, we exit
cadenza space and return to the movement proper.
Another possibility arises when the cadenza articulates a progression
or prolongation other than the standard V . The slur may still be used to
show harmonic prolongation, but in cases of progression from one harmony
to another, we draw an arrow between the boundary sonorities to show the
change of Stufen. Moreover, the function of one of the boundary sonorities
may be called into question. To model this functional ambiguity, the boundary
l ` 77777
. l l
0 l
l l l l

6 5 6
!
4 3 4
V7 vii7/V V64 V7
!
( V64 V7
Example 9. Anthony Halsteads cadenza to Mozarts Concert Rondo for Horn and Orchestra
in E major, K. 371, and analytic overview

(a)
ii6 V7 6
( IV
5
IV6 )
(b)
ii6 V7 6 IV6
( IV 5
V7 )
Example 10. Two analyses of the cadenza to Schumanns Fantasy for Violin and Orchestra in
C major
bracket is drawn with dashed lines. The written-out cadenza from Schumanns
Fantasy for Violin and Orchestra in C major illustrates both of these notations.
While Schumanns cadenza clearly opens on an IV chord, its ending is open
to interpretation. The soloists final sonority is an arpeggiated IV 6 chord, a
harmony whose tones are sounded by the return of the orchestra as well, with
one exception: the G (5) in the bass instruments. Two analytic possibilities
suggest themselves. First, we might understand the cadenza to be a prolonga-
tion of the subdominant harmony, as illustrated by Example 10a. Here, the
intervening dominant resolves deceptively to IV 6 and ultimately serves as a
harmonized bass passing tone between 4 and 6. The pedal dominant in the
orchestras reentry can be understood as a precursor to the ensuing harmony.
Alternately, we might assume that it is the dominant that is in effect upon the
orchestras reentrance, in which case the soloists IV 6 at the end of the cadenza
serves as a harmonized bass passing tone between 7 and 5, serving to prolong
the dominant (Example 10b). In both examples, the final bracket is dashed to
indicate that there is some doubt about the function of the final sonority.
The brackets, slurs, and arrows analytic overviews in the examples above
are designed to accompany a Schenkerian analysis of the cadenza and to
model cadenzas that can be considered parenthetical to their movements
tonal structures. But many written-out cadenzas are clearly integral to their
movements local tonal structure. As such, they should be simply included
within a Schenkerian analysis of the movement. But these cadenzas give us
pause to consider their function on a global level: If a cadenza is integral to its
movements tonal structure, does it follow that it is integral to the movements
form as well?
The cadenza as formal parenthesis
Thus far, I have addressed only the cadenzas local, harmonic function, but the
cadenza also operates on a global, formal level. Historically, this formal func-
tion has been to highlight salient cadences; in fact, modern English is the only

Western language to distinguish between the words cadence and cadenza

(Badura-Skoda, Drabkin, and Jones 2001, 783). By the mid-eighteenth-century
we find composers such as J. C. Bach and Haydn using the cadenza to mark
the cadence at the end of the solo recapitulation in their concertos. In later
classic-era examples, the cadenza still marks the moment of tonal closure, but
also serves to divide the final orchestral ritornello.34 In most of these works,
the cadenza appears in the score as a mere fermata; the actual content is
left up to the performer. After Beethoven, though, composers tended either
to write their cadenzas into the score or to dispense with them altogether.35
These romantic-era cadenzas were not limited to the ends of concerto move-
ments but could appear in almost any musical form and could take on a vari-
ety of formal functions, from exposing themes to concluding the develop-
ment, to providing coda-like opportunities to clarify or resolve elements of
the concerto movement proper. By the end of the nineteenth century, we find
pieces like Strausss Till Eulenspiegel introducing their principal themes within
a cadenza. Clearly, this linguistic metaphor has been stretched to the break-
ing point; introducing a central thought within a parenthetical insertion is a
gesture almost unthinkable in a work of prose. Thus, the formal function of
the cadenza, like the tonal function of the chord, proves flexible, explaining
why scholars seem undecided as to whether the cadenza is a component of
form or merely a formal interruption.36
Over its history, three developing aspects of the cadenza parallel its
changing formal function. The first is thematic. Early cadenzas, like the one
in Example 5a, were little more than melodic decoration, adopted to elabo-
rate a structural cadence and/or provide a brief moment to display the vir-
tuosity of the soloist(s). In such instances, the content comprised the usual
scales, arpeggios, and surface-level melodic elaborations native to passage
work. Upon reaching the high classic era, however, we find that many of the
cadenzas Mozart wrote for his own concertos after 1779 contain statements of
themes from the movement proper, woven into the virtuosic display.37 For the
34 Caplin 1998 (243 and 251) states that classic-era caden- stein 1989 hears the cadenza as the extreme example, in
zas interrupt the final orchestral ritornello, separating it into tonal music, of an interpolation that delays the continuation
two parts. See also Green 1975 (242). of a fixed structure; the formal design and (often) the metri-
cal pattern are forced to wait (4243).
35 Of course, there are some notable exceptions. Brahmss
violin concerto, for example, contains space for an impro- 37 Badura-Skoda, Drabkin, and Jones 2001 (78788) notes
vised cadenza, probably as a gesture of reconciliation to that Bach, his sons, Haydn, and Mozart all composed non-
his longtime friend, the violinist Joseph Joachim, who pre- thematic cadenzas. Mozarts really start being thematic
miered the work. in nature only after 1779. Despite this, Levin 1975 (1112)
claims that thematic content in Mozarts cadenzas is irrel-
36 Badura-Skoda 1962 argues for the formal necessity of the
evant, whereas Melkus 1991 (8491) goes so far as to sug-
cadenza by stating that the classical concerto form would
gest that Mozarts piano cadenzas can be transcribed to
be upset by the omission of cadenzas (215). Badura-Skoda,
serve as violin cadenzas as long as one simply replaces the
Drabkin, and Jones 2001 (783) also assert that cadenzas
piano concerto themes with violin concerto themes.
written out by the performer are often an important struc-
tural component of the movement. On the other hand, Roth-

most part, these are moderately developed reminiscences, but their presence
confirms a subtle, yet profound, change in the cadenza: It was becoming piece
specific. Whereas thematically void elaborations could be arguably dismissed
from formal considerations, the appearance of themes unique to the move-
ment at hand suggests a more intimate connection between the cadenza and
the music surrounding it.
Second, with increasing appearances of themes in the cadenza came
increasing developments of those themes. While Mozart restricted himself
both melodically and harmonically in this regard,38 Beethoven tended toward
bona fide development in his cadenzas;39 in fact, one might say that it is with
Beethoven that the cadenza and coda form functions begin to fuse together
(Whitmore 1991, 18893).40 Thematic developments in the cadenzas of later
concertos, such as Schumanns piano concerto, achieved a measure of impor-
tance such that one could not imagine simply deleting them and retaining an
unaltered sense of form.
Third, increased thematic presentation and development in turn
demanded greater harmonic content within the cadenza, leading to the
extended prolongations of dominant or tonic Stufen already discussed and
vitiating the tonal importance of the opening chord. In turn, the length of
the cadenza grew until it began to take on formal characteristics of its own.
Mozarts cadenzas tend toward a tripartite organization in which thematic
reminiscence occurs mainly in the tonic key. The cadenzas of Beethoven and
later composers explode these tidy confines and take on the characteristics
of free fantasy, sometimes rivaling the development section itself in terms of
scope and length.
These developments in the cadenza, however, posed a danger to
romantic-era composers. Left to the whims of performers, truly developmen-
tal cadenzas had the potential to significantly reshape the form of the move-
ment proper. Thus, the formal developments of the cadenza throughout
history engage a chicken-and-egg relationship with compositional control.
As the cadenzas formal and tonal functions increasingly came to affect the
understanding of the entire movement, composers exerted more and more
control over the content of the cadenza. Likewise, increased compositional
investment yielded greater returns in the cadenzas formal salience.
38 Fetsch 1991 (13) states that most Mozart cadenzas pre 39 Golovatchoff 1974 (16) contrasts Mozarts thematic
sent one or more themes and immediately alter and develop reminiscence to Beethovens thematic development in their
them, although the brevity of this development and the sta- piano cadenzas. Swain 1988 (5758) states that Mozart
bility of the tonic key suggest that Mozart did not intend cadenzas prolong V and simply embellish a cadence and
them to reach the level of his development sections proper. therefore do not require a separate formal section, while
A summary of the harmonic tendencies in Mozarts caden- Beethovens long cadenzas prolong I, allowing for modula-
zas (themes in tonic, use of tonic, parallel minor, VI, and tion, and require a separate formal section.
circle-of-fifths harmonies as tonicized key areas, but rarely
40 The cadenza to the first movement of Beethovens Piano
any others) appears in Schrade 1995 (5963).
Concerto in C minor is a good example.

Most problematic, then, are the late classic-era and early romantic-era
concertos, because they stand near the end of the tradition in which the
cadenza was left up to the performer. Perhaps the reason we care so deeply
about the cadenzas modern performers choose for this repertoire is not due
simply to stylistic considerations but rather is because we fear that cadenzas
penned by the inept will somehow impoverish the works in which we hear
them. If true, this statement marks not only the decreasing appropriateness
of the parenthetical metaphor to the cadenza, but also points to an artistic
dilemma most obvious in the concerto. Concertos containing performers
cadenzas, more than any other tradition in common-practice music, engage
the tensions inherent in our (essentially, nineteenth-century) understanding
of art as personal expression. The interpretive layer added by the performer
is heightened because someone other than the composer has the power to
determine a significant number of the notes we hear in the piece.41 Like
Schoenbergs orchestrations of Bach or Stravinskys Pulcinella, these works
lead us to ask: Whose piece is it anyway?
The best cadenzas rise to this artistic challenge. Many not only embrace
compositional unity, comprising the expected motivic and sequential pas-
sage work and thematic presentations, but also make explicit the secondary
nature of their artistic voice by recomposing various passages from the move-
ment proper. In such cases, the parenthetical nature of the cadenza could
more appropriately be likened unto a bracketed editorial remark, a reaction
to, or analysis of, the concerto movement in music rather than in prose.42
Many such cadenzas arose naturally out of nineteenth-century reactions to
e ighteenth-century concertos. While these cadenzas, when played in the con-
text of eighteenth-century music, strike us today as grotesque in their pro-
portions and stylistic disjunctions, the glorification of the virtuoso performer
was central to the performance practice of the romantic era (Isaacs 1986,
3941)43late-eighteenth- and nineteenth-century audiences (not unlike
todays jazz audiences) customarily applauded the soloist after the cadenza
rather than after the movements conclusion (Hailparn 1981, 51). In fact, the
41 Nattiez 1990 (6990) addresses this question of the per- 43 In fact, this trend toward the cadenza as individual
formers role in relationship to the composers in discussing expression seems to have begun in the late eighteenth cen-
the concept of the musical work. tury. Grayson 1998 (102) states that Mozart did everything
possible to prevent others from playing his cadenzasthey
42 Drabkin 1996: The cadenza, instead of attempting to
were, to him, an aspect of performance, not of precompo-
redefine the role between soloist and orchestra, rewrites
sition; consequently, others were expected to play their
the end of the recapitulation from the soloists point of
own cadenzas. Whitmore 1991 (5859) states that the vir-
view (177); Drabkin 1996 (164) also mentions hearing only
tuoso concerto led to the decline of the cadenza because
one passage in Mozarts cadenzas that constitutes an analy-
there was no need to showcase virtuosity there due to the
sis of the work, bars 2123 of K. 488, I, which telescope
abundance of virtuoso passages throughout the concerto
the motive of bar 5ff. Kramer 1991 (11821) states that
proper. Gauldin 2004 links the disappearance of the cadenza
the cadenza brings the performer and composer into rap-
to the emergence of the apotheosis in nineteenth-century
prochement, offering the opportunity to rewrite or redefine
concertos.
the piece even if the performer of the cadenza is also the
composer of the piece.

very stylistic disjunction between cadenza and concerto helped to make the
works second artistic voicethe performers voicemore obvious.44 Todays
performers typically walk a middle line in their cadenzas between including
some aspect of personal reaction and remaining within the style of the move-
ment proper, an ideal summarized by John Mueter:
[The cadenza] is meant to be a personal commentary, reworking the themes
presented in the movement and possibly even containing some additional new
material. The cadenza should always be in keeping with the general character
of the concerto movement itself. It is not, as is commonly supposed, merely a
vehicle for the soloist to flaunt his dazzling technique; nor is it meant to be a
potpourri of the themes of the movement, or a second development section.
Likewise, a cadenza which is exceedingly long tends to draw undue attention to
itself. Most cadenzas written for Mozart concerti in the nineteenth century can
be found to be objectionable on one or all of these groundsnot to mention
the fault of stylistic impropriety. (1982, 29)45
But our contemporary devotion to the Urtext and to correct performance

practiceour distress at hearing, say, Beethoven and Glenn Gould together
in some sort of unholy unionshould not blind us to the musical insights and
sense of wit these cadenzas offer. Skillfully composed cadenzas by performer/
composers exploit the tensions between local and global functions, blurring
the tonal-rhetorical boundaries with the movement proper and initiating
subtle rehearings of the music outside cadenza space.
Because the performance practice movement of the twentieth century
did not influence composer-performers of the romantic era, their cadenzas
often strike us today as bloated, stylistically inappropriate, and/or idiosyncratic.
But many of the nineteenth centurys best-known composer/performers
Beethoven, Clara Schumann, Faur, Gounod, Saint-Sans, and Brahms
penned cadenzas to eighteenth-century concertos that give us intriguing
insights into how these musicians reacted to the music of their predecessors.
Some even imply a sort of recomposition based on anxiety of influence, not
unlike the twentieth-century examples cited by Joseph Straus (1990). Take, for
instance, Mozarts Piano Concerto in C minor, K. 491. Since no cadenzas by
Mozart survive for this concerto (and perhaps due to this works romantic
sensibility), nineteenth-century performers composed a wealth of cadenzas
for it.46 If we attempt to listen to the C-minor concerto with nineteenth-cen-
tury ears, we might be drawn to certain chromatic details of the opening
44 Grayson 1998 (93) suggests that stylistically contrast- 45 Mueter does later (1982, 30) admit that romantic com-
ing cadenzas accentuate the cadenzas extrastructural role, posers were writing cadenzas informed by a different aes-
while stylistically appropriate cadenzas have an opposite thetic than the one in force either today or during the eigh-
effect. See also the comments on Beethovens cadenza for teenth century.
Mozarts D-minor concerto in Kramer 1991 (127).
46 The same can be said of Mozarts D-minor concerto,
K.466.

theme that remain largely unexplored by Mozart, including: the substitution

of VI for I, the incipient diminished-seventh chord [CEF(A)], and the
chromatic double neighbor about 5. Additionally, the appearance of the prin-
cipal theme in E minor later in the exposition might suggest the beginning
of an equal division of the octaveCEGBa large-scale composing-
out of the minor thirds native to the theme itself. While Mozart never presents
the theme in either G (F) or B (A) minor, Brahms, Faur, and Gounod all
use at least one of these keys within their cadenzas for this movement. More-
over, these romantic composers cadenzas revel in both surface-level and mid-
dleground chromatic neighbors (see the B-major section in Faurs cadenza
and the D-major section in Gounods, e.g.), chromatic 56 shifts, and aug-
mented triadsgestures that evoke a sonic milieu largely unavailable to a
musician of Mozarts time.
In the twentieth century, cadenzas for late-eighteenth-century concertos
run the gamut from those that attempt to mimic the stylistic convention of the
time (see, e.g., Alfred Brendels cadenza to the first movement of Mozarts
Piano Concerto in D minor, K. 466) to those that open up entirely new har-
monic, textural, and formal realms within the cadenza space (e.g., Glenn
Goulds 1966 cadenzas to Beethovens Piano Concerto in C major).47
The analytic upshot of these historical developments is that, as analysts,
we must decide not only if the cadenza is essential to the tonal structure of
the movement in which it appears, but also whether it is essential to the for-
mal structure. Cadenzas that are not formally essential are best left out of any
form diagrams and discussions. On the other hand, those cadenzas intrinsic to
the movements form should be noted in the form diagram proper and ana-
lyzed with regard to the formal functions they effect: expository (the presen-
tation of new thematic material), developmental, recapitulatory (especially if
that material is not properly recapitulated in the movement proper), and/or
coda (a clarifying, resolving, or rehearing of some details from the movement
proper).48 Form-functional abbreviations may be appended to the slur-and-
brackets analytical overviews of cadenzas tonal structures presented earlier
in this article. The relevant themes and their functions are represented by
the theme label(s) followed by the function in subscript. Thus, P2 dev indicates
development of the second theme from the principle tonal area. Likewise,
P1 + S2 coda indicates the uncovering of a musical connection between the first
47 Brendels cadenza contains stereotypical use of mixture, ers include Stockhausens cadenzas (written mainly for his
diminished-seventh chords, and thematic fragmentation. children) to Mozarts wind concertos; Bartoks cadenza for
This cadenza is audible in the Philips Complete Mozart Mozarts Concerto for Two Pianos in E major, K. 365; and
recording of the concerto. See also Badura-Skoda 1967 and Busonis many cadenzas to Mozarts piano concertos.
1956 for other stylistically consistent cadenzas. Goulds
48 Note that my more traditional use of the term formal
cadenza appears in his recording of Beethovens C-major
functions differs from the reworking of this concept in
concerto with the Columbia Symphony under Vladimir
Caplin 1998.
Golschmann from the December 18, 1966, radio broadcast.
Other interesting cadenzas by twentieth-century compos-

(a)
236
5 4 3 2

()
!

5 I IV6 V7
3
B : V64 i
JMT Job 149-2 Bribitzer-Stull

Example 11b
!

50:2
B : V64 I V7
(b)
Measure 1 16 24 36 41 56 65 76 91 105 112 127 148 164 171 199

Form
JMT 50:2 Exposition
SectionJob 149-2 Bribitzer-Stull Example 11c Development Recapitulation
A trans. B retrans. A trans. C retrans. A trans. B retrans. Cadenza A
Theme P1 T1 S1 T2 P1 T1 D1 D2 P1 T2 P1 T1 S1 T2 P1 T2 P1
Key B F B g E c b B

(c)
P1 dev T2 dev T2 dev
I IV6 I
( V64 V7 )
Example 11. Analysis of Mozart K. 333 cadenza. (a) Tonal structure (accidentals remain in effect until canceled).
(b) Form overview. (c) Cadenza overview
theme of the principle tonal area and the second theme of the second tonal
area.49
As an illustration of the analytic concepts and notation presented thus
far, let us turn to the third movement of Mozarts Piano Sonata in B major,
K.333. This movement is a textbook example of what many scholars refer to
as sonata-rondo formwith one exception: It has a cadenza. With regards
to analyzing the movement, the cadenza poses two problems: (1) Should its
tonal structure be graphed part-and-parcel within the movement proper?
(2)What role should it play within the analysis of the movements form? In
answer to problem 1, my own preference would be to graph the cadenza sepa-
rately from the movement proper since I hear it clearly as a tonal insertion,
prolonging the dominant (see Example 11a). In answer to problem 2, I would
note the cadenzas placement within a diagram of the movements form and
then append form-functional notation to my overview of the cadenzas struc-
ture (see Examples 11b and 11c).
Although another analyst might include the music of the cadenza within
a Schenkerian graph of this movement, my decision not to do so reflects my
hearing of this cadenza as tonally parenthetical.50 On the other hand, another
analyst might choose not to include the cadenza in a chart of the movements
form. My reason for doing so is twofold: First, given that this is sonata-rondo
form, the unusual appearance of a cadenza is significant enough to warrant its
inclusion. And, second, the fact that Mozart not only included a cadenza, but
wrote it out himself, meaning that this cadenza specifically was to be played in
the movement, implies that the composer conceived of it as part of the move-
ments form. In terms of its formal function, the cadenza does not play a vital
role, although the extended development of the T2 themes rising chromati-
cism suggests that Mozart felt the movement needed more developmental
space given that much of the C section (development) was devoted to the
exposition of new material (the D1 and D2 themes noted on the form chart).
Nine cadenza types
The analytic interpretation of the K. 333 cadenza abovea musical statement

that is tonally inessential and formally unclearis but one of nine possibili-
ties. In terms of both its local-level, tonal function and its global-level, for-
mal function, a cadenza may be essential, inessential, or somewhere between
(see Table 1 for a summary). Ideally, cadenza analysis of the kind done in
this study should comprise a Schenkerian graph of the cadenza, a slur-and-
brackets overview, and a form chart (e.g., Example 11). In this final section
49 The method for naming themes in this article is derived 50 I have been unable to locate any published Schenkerian
from Hepokoski and Darcy 2006. The analytic notation is, analysis of this movement to see how this question has
however, flexible enough to admit any methodology for been handled by other scholars.
naming themes, and even for adding other form functions.

Table 1. A Tonal/Formal Cadenza-Function Matrix
Formal Structure
Tonal Structure Inessential Unclear Essential
Inessential Early examples as well as Formal elucidation, Rare.
many others. addition or commentary See Strauss, Till
See Beethoven, Piano within tonal parenthesis. Eulenspiegels lustige Streiche,
Sonata in C major, op. 2/3. See Beethoven, cadenza to mm. 313.
Mozarts Piano Concerto
no. 20 in D minor, I.
Unclear No formal function but Formal elucidation, Important formal function

harmonic boundary points addition or commentary couched in tonal-
unclear or ambiguous. that somehow inflects the hierarchical ambiguity
See Schumann, Fantasy sense of tonal structure. belying rhetorical sense of
for Violin and Orchestra. See Brahms, cadenza to parenthesis.
Mozarts Piano Concerto See Sibelius, Violin
no. 17 in G major, I. Concerto.
Essential No thematic treatment of Formal elucidation, Many 19th- and

note despite lack of tonal addition or commentary 20th-century cadenzas
parenthesis. that is part of the written into the score by
See Rachmaninov, Piano movements tonal the composer.
Concerto no. 2 in C minor, structure. See Liszt, Piano Concerto
II, mm. 12229. See Schumann, Intro no. 1 in E Major, I.
duction and Allegro for
Piano and Orchestra.
of the article, I discuss each of the nine possibilities shown in Table 1. Space
prevents me from engaging a detailed cadenza analysis for each of the nine
possibilities, so for many, a prose overview and/or brief musical example must
suffice. The three formally unclear cadenza types below (numbers 2, 5, and 8),
however, offer more in the way of analytic interest, and I therefore treat them
to extensive analysis.
1. Tonally and formally inessential. These are the quintessentially paren-
thetical insertions most common in early- and mid-eighteenth-century music
whose tonal function comprises surface-level diminution and whose formal
function affects little more than the underscoring of a significant cadence.
They simply elaborate one prolonged harmony and include no material spe-
cific to the movement in which they appear (refer again to the cadenza to
Beethovens Piano Sonata in C major, op. 2/3, in Example 5a). As such, they
offer relatively barren ground for analytic investigation and require no addi-
tional discussion.
2. Tonally inessential and formally unclear. Tonally inessential cadenzas that
do contain some thematic material from the movement proper offer more food
for thought. The most common examples of this type of cadenza are those
indicated in the score by the customary paired fermata V and V(7) chords,
but whose content suggests an elaboration of, clarification of, addition to, or

commentary on the form of the movement. These cadenzas, while not essen-
tial to the concerto form, are specific to the concerto movement in question
and, when played in context, offer a valuable paratext whose relation to the
text is perhaps more intimate than that of a parenthetical insertion. Cadenzas
penned by romantic-era performers for Mozarts concertos often fall into this
category.
For an extended illustration, let us turn to Beethovens cadenza for
the first movement of Mozarts Concerto in D minor, K. 466. This cadenza
is a rarity within Beethovens compositional output. Since he virtually never
engaged in public performances of pieces written by other composers, this
cadenza represents a unique opportunity to witness Beethovens musical reac-
tion to Mozart.51 Since the cadenza is inessential to the concerto movements
tonal structure, it should be graphed separately; the measure numbers for the
graphic analysis in example 12a begin with the orchestral chord and end with
the V 7i gesture closing the cadenza. Between these framing sonorities, the
cadenza prolongs the dominant at the deepest level of tonal structure, interpo-
lating a iv (m. 36) chord between the opening V and the resolution to V 7 in m.
48, shown both in the graph and in the overview in Example 12b. Though the
cadenza is not overly long, certain features do stand out as Beethovenian. The
first salient gesture, for instance, is the repetition of the rising bassline motive
featured at the opening of the concerto movement. (The same motivic ges-
ture is used to close the cadenza.) Certainly, we can understand why this ges-
ture appealed to Beethovenmany of his sonata-allegro minor-mode works
achieve a measure of their expressive power from the obsessive repetition of
a simple rhythmic gesture. Second, Beethoven falls almost immediately into a
tonicization of the Neapolitan. This use of E is not unexpected since it does
occur in the concerto movement proper as a brief II6 in mm. 49 and 371 and
as a tonicized key area in the development (m. 220ff.). But the tonicization of
this key at the opening of the cadenza and its concomitant shift to the parallel
minor (E minor) introduces a harmonic move Mozart made in none of his
surviving cadenzas, one that is, rather, characteristic of Beethovens music.52
E minor quickly gives way to the appearance of the second theme of
the second tonal area (S2, m. 19ff.), a theme that appears in the concerto
only twice: in the solo exposition (in F major, the key of the mediant) and
in the recapitulation (in tonic). Beethovens choice of this theme is certainly
appropriate; since it could be considered an underused and underdeveloped
theme in the movement proper, the cadenza is the ideal place to revisit it.53
51 See MacArdle and Misch 1957 (56), which supposes Eroica, the appearance of the main theme in F minor dur-
Beethoven played his cadenza in the context of Mozarts ing the final movement of the Eighth Symphony, and the
concerto at a benefit concert for Constanze Weber Mozart D-major second movement of the C-minor string quartet,
on March 31, 1795. op. 131.
52 Beethovens sudden shifts to the Neapolitan are legion 53 One could extrapolate from the remarks of Grayson 1998
and include such notable examples as the new, E-minor (56) that development of underused or neglected themes is
theme in the development of the first movement of the a laudable function of the cadenza.

(a)
240
5 11 15 27 36 41 45 48 59 65
3 N 2 1
( )

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
!

()

6 iv 6 P64 i
II
i
6 5 iv6 V7
4
d: V64 7
3 N 2 1


!
7

6

iv

V
JMT 50:2
6 Job 149-2 Bribitzer-Stull Example 12b 7
d: V 4 i

(b)
P1 dev S2 coda, dev P1 dev P2 recap P1 dev
- - equal division of octave - - iv iv6 V7

6 b g
4 V7
e
(V )
Example 12. Analysis of Beethovens cadenza for the first movement of Mozarts Piano Concerto in D minor, K. 446. (a) Tonal structure. (b) Cadenza overview
The choice of key, however, is undeniably Beethoven. B major arrives as a

closely related key to the preceding E (D) minor, albeit with enharmonic
reinterpretation.54 But its tonal relation is as far from the D-minor tonic as
possible: not only is it opposite D minor on the circle of fifths, but it is also
opposite in mode. Here, then, for an instant Beethoven opens up a new har-
monic world, almost as if our musical protagonist had stepped out of the
black-and-white Kansas of Mozartean classic-era tonality into the Technicolor
wonder of Beethovens romantic third relations, remaking Mozarts S2 theme
in Beethovens own musical image.
The concentration on S2, a theme here related by chromatic third to
tonic, is a quintessentially romantic-era gesture.55 It is important to remem-
ber that the use of a major-mode second theme in minor-mode sonata forms
requires some adjustment in the recapitulation. In the nineteenth-century,
the most usual solution is for the composer to present the theme in tonic
major, making this S theme something of a redemptive agent that rescues
the formal narrative from the minor mode. The other possibilityMozarts
choice in his concertois to alter the theme such that it works in tonic minor.
Thus, Beethovens presentation of S2 in B accomplishes two remakings of
Mozart. First, the use of B, the minor third below the tonic d, balances the
F-major presentation of S2 we receive in Mozarts concerto movement proper,
making a case for hearing this theme related by symmetrical minor thirds to
tonic. While a classic-era composer would have doubtlessly chosen the dia-
tonic and asymmetrical B major (a major third below tonic) as tonicization
Beethoven prefers the chromatic B major.56 Second, the use of B major
of 6,
provides the major-mode, redemptive quality of second-tonal-material-in-the-
recapitulation favored by the romantic idiom, a sort of Beethovenian per aspera
ad astra alternate ending to the tonal-thematic narrative of the concerto. Thus,
I marked this theme S2 coda, dev on the cadenza overview in Example 12b to indi-
cate both its further development and the formal function of a romantic-era
rehearing of this themes relationship to the movement proper.
Finally, Beethovens motion from the cadenzas opening V to the inter-
polated iv chord in m. 36 is an incipient equal division of the octave, EBG,
54 Kramer 1991 (12631) discusses Beethovens cadenza ment of the C-major piano concerto, just after the cadenza;
at length and the effect it has when heard next to Mozarts the first movement of the G-major concerto, mm. 67, just
music. While Richard Kramer notes, as I do, the Beethove- after the soloist introduces the main theme in G; the sec-
nian foreignness of B major, I find his explanation of B as a ond tonal area of the first movement of the Emperor Con-
C, the ghost of an augmented sixth chord, less convinc- certo; the second movement of the Emperor Concerto
ing than a hearing of B as part of a chain of major thirds (enharmonically, a huge C that resolves as 6 to 5 [B] in the
EBG, leading to the subdominant. transition to the final movement); the second tonal area of
the first movement of the G-major sonata, op. 31/1; and the
55 Friedman 1989 (271) states that subsidiary themes in
ending of the op. 77 Fantasy, which begins in G minor. In the
Beethovens cadenzas always occur in keys other than those
first movement of the Ninth Symphony, there is a shift to B
in which they appeared in the movement proper.
major within a local B major context (mm. 10815). In most
56 B major is one of Beethovens favorite surprise keys of these cases, B major is an unstable area and moves back
a tonality he often uses in his piano music for abrupt distant- via sequence, modal mixture, and/or enharmonic reinterpre-
key relationships. Some examples include the third move- tation to a more expected, stable tonal area.

another Beethovenian harmonic strategy. Again, this is a prolongational strat-

egy we would not expect to find in Mozarts music. The use of II, B major,
and the EBG chain of major thirds may also invite us to hear a sort of com-
mentary on Mozarts music. During the return to V, Beethoven includes, as a
parting shot, an impromptu recapitulation of the P2 themea theme Mozart
omitted from the concertos recapitulation space. We can imagine Beethoven
telling us, in so many notes, that had the concerto been his, Mozarts surface-
level chromaticism would have found its way onto deeper structural levels in
Beethovens hands. Moreover, the concertos second theme and second tonal
area would have played a larger role in structuring Beethovens tonal-thematic
narrative.
3. Tonally inessential but formally essential. The third possibility, tonally
inessential cadenzas essential to formal coherence, is extremely uncommon.
Couching a necessary component of the form within the surface-level elabora-
tion of a single harmony whose prolongational rhetoric suggests a parentheti-
cal insertion is to pit form against tonalitycertainly possible, especially in
romantic-era music, but apparently rare with regard to the cadenza.57 One
example is the opening of Richard Strausss symphonic poem, Till Eulenspiegels
Lustige Streiche. Perhaps as one of Tills tricks, the opening horn theme is given
cadenza-like exposition between a V and its resolution to V 7 and I (Bribitzer-
Stull and Gauldin 2007, 9).
4. Tonally essential but formally inessential. Cadenzas that are tonally essen-
tial to the movement at hand are relatively easy to deal with because they must
be included in any Schenkerian graph of the movement. Such is the case with
the second movement of Rachmaninovs Piano Concerto no. 2 in C minor.
The cadenza spans mm. 12229 of the movement, being initiated by an orches-
tral Neapolitan harmony. The return of the orchestra on tonic seven bars later
requires the intervening solo material in order to make good harmonic sense,
but the solo material itself comprises the flashy virtuoso scalar passages and
rolled chords typical of Rachmaninov rather than any bona fide thematic
material. Thus, analysis of this cadenza requires little outside of including its
tonal structure as a component of the movement proper.
5. Tonally essential but formally unclear. There can be little question that the
cadenza to Schumanns Allegro with Introduction for Piano and Orchestra in
D minor is essential to the movements tonal structure. The opening, fermata
harmony is V of IV, while the cadenza closes on the dominant with the orches-
tral reentry occurring over V . Although a root-position subdominant would
have served as an effective link between the boundary harmonies, Schumanns
57 Formal parentheses are propounded in (1) Kimball 1991, contrast followed by resumption of thematic content, regis-
which draws upon the writings of Riepel and Marx in asking ter, texture, and/or motive after the interruption and consid-
us to hear the second theme as an insertion into a piece ers this to be a particularly Beethovenian gesture; and (3)
whose primary narrative is one of thematic unity; (2) Kinder- Samarotto 1999 (193208).
man 1988, which defines parentheses as based on musical

harmonies follow a rather more circuitous route through the cadenza, summa-
rized in Example 13a. Note the opening applied-chord harmony changes to a
diminished seventh that resolves to the supertonic, supporting 6 in the upper
line. A fourth progression from 6 lands on an F-major chord, expanded by an
extended neighboring that allows the second theme to appear in the remote
key of B. The remainder of the cadenza moves back toward supertonic har-
mony and eventually accomplishes the customary melodic descent to 2 above
the dominant. Rather than resolving to a root-position tonic, though, the
orchestral reentry converts V to V , allowing for a fluid entrance into another
presentation of the S material in tonic.
Formally, the cadenza is not obviously integral to the movement, although
the use of thematic material from earlier in the work lends it a measure of
formal salience. The development of the transitional idea (T1)a falling
diminished fourth following by rising half-stepis hardly significant, given
the appearance of this material both in the introduction and in the develop-
ment. But the appearance of the S1 theme in B major serves to introduce a
sense of tonal completeness to this theme similar to that discussed above in
Beethovens cadenza to Mozarts D-minor concerto. The original presentation
of the S1 theme in F is counterbalanced tonally by the presentation in B in the
cadenza; each tonal area lies a minor third away from the tonic D. Moreover, F
is native to D minor, while B (minorhere major to accommodate the theme)
is native to D major.
Later in the cadenza, the comingling of D major and D minor is fur-
thered by modal mixture in which an F Stufe and the use of 2, supported
by minor i, take place underneath a significant melodic gesture. The dotted-
eighth-followed-by-sixteenth rhythm in the right hand of the piano moves
from the (augmented) fourth of the T1 theme to the (major) sixth of the S1
theme, each an expressive opening interval integral to thematic identity. The
T1 + S1 coda marking in Example 13b refers to this phenomenon. Moreover,
Schumanns coupling of the S1 sixth and the tonal purview of D minor alludes
to a more thorough sense of tonal integration between the two keys in which
S1 appeared earlier: D major and F major. Faced with the same recapitulation-
of-S problem discussed earlier in the context of Mozarts D-minor concerto,
Schumann, in effect, has his cake and eats it, too, by presenting S1 in the tonic
major during the recapitulation and by bringing it into relation with tonic
minor in the coda. In sum, then, by thematically linking T1 and S1 and tonally
linking D minor and D major, the cadenzas conclusion provides a sense of
unity that, while not essential for formal coherence, nevertheless could not
be simply deleted without impoverishing the listeners understanding of the
work.
6. Tonally and formally essential. As with the other tonally essential exam-
ples, the first cadenza in the first movement of Liszts Piano Concerto no. 1 in
E major must be included in any tonal analysis of the movement since it ame-
liorates the parallel octaves between the VI chord that initiates the cadenza

(a)
244
6 5 4 3 2

() () () ()

!

6

5
4 6 4 6 7 6 6
D: ii6 2 2 5 6 5 5 5 V6 V
3 4 3


!

JMT
D:
50:2 Job 149-2
ii6
Bribitzer-Stull Example 13b ii
5
V6 3

(b)
T1 dev S1 coda T1 + S1 coda
ii6 V64 /VI vii65 /ii ii V6 i V

( V65 /IV V42 )
Example 13. Cadenza to Schumanns Allegro with Introduction in D minor. (a) Tonal structure. (b) Cadenza overview
T1 expo P1 dev
vii7 /ii VII iv V7
( VI V7 )
Example 14. Overview of the first cadenza in the first movement of Liszts Piano Concerto no.
1 in E major
and the V chord that concludes it. Moreover, the opening of the cadenza pre
sents an arpeggiated retransitional idea that not only leads into a statement
of the main theme in C major in the cadenza, but also returns near the end
of the movement to lead back into the main theme in F (m. 70ff.). Thus, the
cadenza is itself formally essential because it exposes thematic material to be
used later in the movement (see Example 14).
7. Tonally unclear but formally inessential. In this category I include caden-
zas whose main purpose is virtuosic display devoid of thematic content but
whose harmonic boundary points are not entirely clear. The cadenza to Schu-
manns Fantasy for Violin and Orchestra in C major discussed earlier and
presented in Example 10 fits this description nicely. Not only is the cadenzas
closing harmony questionable, but the formal need for a cadenza in this work
is doubtful since an opportunity for virtuosic display hardly needs to be pro-
vided, given the many flashy, technical passages in the movement proper.
8. Tonally and formally unclear. Brahmss cadenza for the first movement
of Mozarts Piano Concerto in G major, K. 453, is another excellent example
of a romantic rehearing of Mozart.58 A graph of the cadenzas tonal structure
appears in Example 15a. Measure numbers again begin with 1 for the open-
ing chord. Upon reaching the end of the cadenza, however, the measure
numbers revert to those of the movement proper (m. 328ff.). In this cadenza,
Brahms also remakes many features of Mozarts concerto movement, inviting
the listener to rehear them with the addition of Brahmss own harmonic
fingerprints. For example, Mozarts expansion of the dominant within the
second tonal area (marked ST in Example 15b to reflect its transitional func-
tion within the second tonal area, mm. 13039) is recomposed by Brahms in
mm. 1822 of the cadenza. Brahms retains Mozarts sixteenth-note arpeggio
figure to remind the listener of this moment in the concerto movement, but
whereas Mozarts descending fifths sequence at that point is diatonic, leading
from B (locally VI) to d (locally, i) as part of a larger expansion of A (locally,
V), Brahmss version is fully chromatic, leading from B to D, which then
functions as an enharmonic dominant of F major. This sequence also forms
part of a dominant prolongation, but this one is Brahmsiana complete divi-
58 Aspects of this cadenza are discussed in Wang 1997

(16165).


(a)
Tonal structure with cadenza ending on VI
8 11 16 18 22 25 328 332
3 N 3

() () ()

!
( )

( ) () () ()

( )

8
V 7
III III V7 VI 35
4
V 2 I6 ii56 V7 I
V 6
4
3 N 3 2 1

!
( )

( )

8 7 VI 35 I6 ii56 V7 I
V 6
4
5
3
cadenza 328
3 2 1

!

V 65 I ii56 V I
JMT 50:2 Job 149-2 Bribitzer-Stull Example 15b 43
Tonal structure with cadenza ending on I
(b)
K dev ST dev ST dev K dev
V7 / III III iii VII

V64 7
( V64 V7 VI )
Example 15. Analysis of Brahmss cadenza to the first movement of Mozarts Piano Concerto
in G major, K. 453. (a) Comparison of post-cadenza measures tonal structure. (b) Cadenza
overview
sion of the octave into major thirds: DBFD. One might imagine this to be
a telescoped and chromatically altered transformation of the diatonic chains
of descending thirds in Mozarts concerto that appear in mm. 3540 leading
down from I to V (Brahms also quotes these in his cadenza, mm. 1116).
Brahmss cadenza prolongs the dominant at the deepest tonal level and
makes use of symmetrical third relations. But by far the most startling ele-
ment of this cadenza is the license Brahms takes with its conclusion. Here, V
resolves deceptively to VI, a move made possible by Mozarts scoring: The end

of the cadenza resolves to a bare octave G in the cellos and basses. Because
of Brahmss VI, the analysis in Example 15 ignores Mozarts tonic pedal in
bars 32830 in favor of the harmonic motion going on in the upper voices.
Brahmss E chord here serves two purposes. It is itself an unexpected, unpre-
pared, almost puerile gesture, a sort of nose-thumbing at the rhetorical closure
of the cadenza. But it also mimicsone might say mocksa similar gesture in
the movement proper. Mozarts orchestral closing section in both the expo-
sition and the recapitulation (mm. 4953 and 31923) avoids tonic closure
with a brief, deceptive tonicization of E. These abbreviated purple patches
seem gratuitous, almostdare we say it?parenthetical, since neither E nor
the melodic gesture of these passages plays a significant role elsewhere in the
movement. If this hearing is plausible, then Brahmss E ending not only sub-
verts the cadenzas close parenthesis, but also extends the sense of Mozarts
insertion begun in m. 319. Since the harmonic progression and rhetoric of
the bar-long trill on 2 in m. 318 set up an expectation for I, the appearance
of VI (E) thwarts that expectation. The appearance of the cadential V , the
cadenza, and the resolution to V and I in mm. 32728 would normally be
heard to ameliorate the earlier, thwarted authentic cadence, but in Brahmss
cadenza we are forced to wait yet again. Now, it is the orchestral cadence in
m. 332 that achieves tonal closure. Remarkably, Brahmss cadenza shifts the
moment of tonal closure for the entire work forward four bars, affecting (albeit
slightly) both the tonal and formal architecture of Mozarts movement.
9. Tonally unclear but formally essential. For my final category I turn to
the first movement of Sibeliuss Violin Concerto. Serious consideration must
be given to this cadenza in any form analysis of the movement since it is the
cadenza itself that comprises the entirety of the development, working with
the principal thematic material in a series of rising iterations punctuated by
planed diminished-seventh sonorities. Tonally, it is clear that the cadenza par-
ticipates in the prolongation of the subdominant harmony, which moves from
first inversion in m. 114 to root-position in m. 163 (shown by the slur con-
necting iv6 to iv in Example 16). What remains unclear is exactly where the
cadenza
JMT 50:2 begins (henceBribitzer-Stull
Job 149-2 the curly brackets in Example
Example 16 16). If the final orches-
tral statement before the exclusively solo material is taken as the beginning,
then the cadenza proper begins on the minor dominant (m. 125) and ends on
P1 dev
planing 7 v
V/ vi
vi planing 7 iv
iv6 V7 /v v iv )
!
Example 16. Overview of the cadenza in the first movement of Sibeliuss Violin Concerto

the subdominant. If, however, the rhetoric of the solo flourishes and the pro-
longation of iv take precedence, then the cadenza begins earlier, in m. 114.
Conclusion
The cadenza has long stood among the most important topics studied by per-
formers. But its significance goes far beyond style analysis and performance
practice alone; it has the potential to occupy a vaunted position within analytic
discourse, as well. Just as the best cadenzas may invite us to rehear the music
surrounding them, so too does the topic of the cadenza invite a rehearing
within the larger field of music scholarship. In addition to problematizing the
parenthesis metaphor, in this study I have also attempted to present analytic
notation that models the more significant challenges posed by the cadenza: its
tonal structure and its fluid function within concerto and other forms.
In so doing, I realize that the cadenza enjoys an ability to accomplish
what prose cannota rapprochement among composer, performer, and ana-
lyst and an opportunity to use music itself as a vessel for musical discourse.
This, as much as anything, may argue against the parenthesis metaphor for
the cadenza. While the cadenza can be understood as extraneous to a mini-
mal interpretation of the text, the concerto-as-text invitesnay, begsthe
inclusion of a second textual layer in the form of the cadenza, confronting
the listener not with an Urtext, but rather an annotated text. Whether or not
we hear these added compositional voices counterpointing or distorting the
voice of the original composer, the performer has asserted him- or herself as
analyst, too, capable of making an argument and, perhaps, the foundations
of an entire theory.59
Works Cited
Aldwell, Edward and Carl Schachter. 2003. Harmony and Voice Leading, 3rd ed. Belmont:
Thompson Learning.
Badura-Skoda, Eva, William Drabkin, and Andrew V. Jones. 2001. Cadenza. In The New Grove
Dictionary of Music and Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie, 78390. Oxford: Macmillan.
Badura-Skoda, Paul and Eva. 1956. Kadenz und Eingnge zum Klavierkonzert in C-moll, K.V. 491.
Vienna: Verlag Doblinger.
. 1962. Interpreting Mozart on the Keyboard, trans. L. Black. London: Barrie & Rockliff.
. 1967. Kadenzen, Eingnge und Auszierungen zu Klavierkonzerten von W.A. Mozart. Kassel:
Brenreiter Verlag.
Beach, David. 1967. The Functions of the Six-Four Chord in Tonal Music. Journal of Music
Theory 11: 231.
. 1990a. The Cadential Six-Four as Support for Scale Degree Three of the Fundamental
Line. Journal of Music Theory 34: 8199.
59 Lewin 1969 (63 n. 4) suggests that the only complete

analyses of music are accomplished via performance.
Music, as distinct from prose, offers us another avenue for
hearing the piece betterthe ultimate goal of analysis.

. 1990b. More on the Six-Four. Journal of Music Theory 34: 28190.

Bribitzer-Stull, Matthew and Robert Gauldin. 2007. Hearing Wagner in Till Eulenspiegel:
Strausss Merry Pranks Reconsidered. Intgral 21: 139.
Brown, Matthew. 1993. Tonality and Form in Debussys Prlude lAprs-midi dun Faune.
Music Theory Spectrum 15: 12743.
Caplin, William. 1998. Classical Form. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
. 2004. The Classical Cadence: Conceptions and Misconceptions. Journal of the Ameri-
can Musicological Society 57: 51117.
Clark, William. 1982. Heinrich Schenker and the Nature of the Seventh Chord. Journal of
Music Theory 26: 22157.
Dempster, Douglas J. 1998. Does Music Even Have a Grammar? Music Scienti: The Journal
of the European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music 2: 5565.
Drabkin, William. 1996. An Interpretation of Musical Dreams: Towards a Theory of the Mozart
Piano Concerto Cadenza. In Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Essays on His Life and His Music,
ed. Stanley Sadie, 16177, New York: Oxford University Press.
. 1998. Analysis as a Practical Tool: A Case Study. Analitica, Sept. www.muspe.unibo
.it/gatm/index.htm.
Fetsch, Wolfgang. 1991. Cadenzas in the Mozart Concertos. Clavier 30/10: 1317.
Forster, Robert. 1992. Der Kopfstze der Klavierkonzerte Mozarts und Beethovens: Gesamtaufbau,
Solokadenz, und Schlussbildung. Munich: Fink.
Friedman, Richard Marc. 1989. The Original Cadenzas in the Piano Concertos of Beethoven:
An Analysis. Ph.D. diss., Boston University.
Gauldin, Robert. 2004. New Twists for Old Endings: Cadenza and Apotheosis in the Romantic
Piano Concerto. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Music Theory Society
of New York State, Rochester.
Goldenberg, Yosef. 2001. Prolongation of Seventh Chords in Tonal Music. Ph.D. diss.,
Hebrew University.
Golovatchoff, Dika. 1974. A Study of Cadenzas to Mozarts Piano Concertos K. 466 and
K.491. D.M.A. diss., Indiana University.
Grayson, David. 1998. Mozart Piano Concertos no. 20 in D minor, K. 466, and no. 21 in C major,
K.467. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Green, Douglass. 1975. Form in Tonal Music: An Introduction to Analysis. Fort Worth: Holt, Rine-
hart and Winston.
Hailparn, Lydia. 1981. Exploring Cadenzas to Beethovens Piano Concertos. College Music
Symposium 21: 4859.
Hepokoski, James and Warren Darcy. 1997. The Medial Caesura and Its Role in the Eighteenth-
Century Sonata Exposition. Music Theory Spectrum 19: 11554.
. 2006. Elements of Sonata Theory: Norms, Types, and Deformations in the Late-Eighteenth-
Century Sonata. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Huddleston, Rodney and Geoffrey K. Pullum, eds. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English
Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hull, Kenneth. 1998. Allusive Irony in Brahmss Fourth Symphony. In Brahms Studies, ed.
David Brobeck, vol. 2, 13568. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Isaacs, Nicholas Stephen. 1986. The Keyboard Cadenza. D.M.A. diss., Stanford University.
Kielian-Gilbert, Marianne. 2003. Interpreting Schenkerian Prolongation. Music Analysis 22:
51104.
Kimball, G. Cook. 1991. The Second Theme in Sonata Form as Insertion. Music Review 52:
27993.
Kinderman, William. 1988. Thematic Contrast and Parenthetical Enclosure in the Piano
Sonatas, op. 109 and 111. In Zu Beethoven: Aufstze und Dokumente, ed. Harry Gold-
schmidt, 4359. Berlin: Neue Musik.

Kollmann, Augustus Frederic Christopher. 1973. An Essay on Practical Musical Composition. New
York: Da Capo.
Kramer, Richard. 1991. Cadenza Contra Text: Mozart in Beethovens Hands. Nineteenth-
Century Music 15: 11631.
Larson, Steve. 1997. The Problem of Prolongation in Tonal Music: Terminology, Perception,
and Expressive Meaning. Journal of Music Theory 41: 10136.
Laufer, Edward. 1985. Interpolations and Parenthetical Passages. Paper presented at the First
International Schenker Symposium, Mannes College, New York.
Lerdahl, Fred and Ray Jackendoff. 1983. A Generative Theory of Tonal Music. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press.
Levin, Robert D. 1975. Improvisation and Embellishment in Mozarts Piano Concertos. Musi-
cal Newsletter 5/2: 314.
Lewin, David. 1969. Behind the Beyond: A Response to Edward T. Cone. Perspectives of New
Music 7/2: 5969.
MacArdle, Donald W. and Ludwig Misch. 1957. New Beethoven Letters. Norman: University of
Oklahoma Press.
Mak, Su Yin. 2003. Mixing Memory and Desire: The Outer Movements of Schuberts Piano
Trio in E major, D. 929. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for
Music Theory, Madison.
Matthews, Denis. 1978. Adrian Boult Lecture: Cadenzas in Piano Concertos. Recorded Sound
68: 72326.
Melkus, Eduard. 1991. On the Problem of Cadenzas in Mozarts Violin Cadenzas, trans. Tim
Burris. In Perspectives on Mozart Performance, ed. R. Larry Todd and Peter Williams, 7491.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mies, Paul. 1970. Der Krise der Konzertkadenz bei Beethoven. Bonn: Bouvier.
Morgan, Robert. 1976. Dissonant Prolongation: Theoretical and Compositional Precedents.
Journal of Music Theory 20: 4991.
Mueter, John. 1982. An Unpublished Cadenza by Gounod for Mozarts Piano Concerto KV
491. Current Musicology 34: 2641.
Nattiez, Jean Jacques. 1990. Music and Discourse: Toward a Semiology of Music, trans. Carolyn
Abbate. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Patel, Aniruddh D. 2003. Language, Music, Syntax and the Brain. Nature Neuroscience 6: 674
81.
Quantz, Johann Joachim. 1985. On Playing the Flute, 2nd ed., trans. E. R. Reilly. New York:
Schirmer.
Robbins, Mary. 1991. Reinterpreted Elements in Mozarts Cadenzas for His Piano Concertos.
Mozart-Jahrbuch 18287.
. 1992. Mozarts Cadenzas for the First Movements of His Piano Concertos: The Influ-
ence of Harmonic Symmetry on Their Function and Structure. D.M.A. diss., University
of Texas.
Rosen, Charles. 1980. Sonata Forms. New York: Norton.
Rothstein, William. 1989. Phrase Rhythm in Tonal Music. New York: Schirmer.
Samarotto, Frank. 1999. A Theory of Temporal Plasticity in Tonal Music: An Extension to the
Schenkerian Approach to Rhythm with Special Reference to Beethovens Late Music.
Ph.D. diss., City University of New York.
Schenker, Heinrich. 1979. Free Composition, trans. and ed. Ernst Oster. New York: Longman.
Schmalfeldt, Janet. 2002. Music That Turns Inward: New Roles for Interior Movements and
Secondary Themes in the Early Nineteenth Century. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the Society for Music Theory, Columbus.
Schrade, Rorianne C. 1995. Cadenzas to Mozarts Piano Concerto K. 467: A Perspective on
Theory and Practice. D.M.A. diss., Temple University.

Sloboda, John. 1990. Music as a Language. In Music and Child Development: Proceedings of the
1987 Denver Conference, ed. Frank R. Wilson and Franz L. Roehmann, 2843. St. Louis:
MMB Music.
Straus, Joseph N. 1987. The Problem of Prolongation in Post-Tonal Music. Journal of Music
Theory 31: 121.
. 1990. Remaking the Past: Musical Modernism and the Influence of the Tonal Tradition. Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Swain, Joseph P. 1988. Form and Function of the Classical Cadenza. Journal of Musicology 6:
2759.
. 1995. The Concept of Musical Syntax. Musical Quarterly 79: 281308.
Trk, Daniel Gottlob. 1982. School of Clavier Playing, trans. Raymond H. Haggh. Lincoln: Uni-
versity of Nebraska Press.
Wang, Esther. 1997. Mozart Piano Concerto in G major, K. 453: The First Movement Caden-
zas. D.M.A. diss., University of Cincinnati College-Conservatory of Music.
Whitmore, Philip. 1991. Unpremeditated Art: The Cadenza in the Classical Keyboard Concerto.
Oxford: Clarendon.
Matthew Bribitzer-Stull is associate professor of music theory at the University of Minnesota. He

won the Society for Music Theorys 2007 Emerging Scholar Award for his article The ACE Complex:
The Origin and Function of Chromatic Major-Third Collections in Nineteenth-Century Music, published
in Music Theory Spectrum.


The Cadenza As Parenthesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Cadenza As Parenthesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Music Theory

The Cadenza as Parenthesis

conventional wisdom holds that the cadenza is a musical parenthesis.

Journal of Music Theory 50:2, Fall 2006

Published by Duke University Press

afterthoughts, their tonal structures and formal functions mentioned in pass-

Published by Duke University Press

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 213

Linguistic metaphors also permeate our musical discourse.5 Many of

Published by Duke University Press

A variety of ways in which written English indicates an insertion are

The Wagner tuba (an instrument first crafted in 1875 by Georg

The Wagner tubathat wild beast of the orchestrais

The Wagner tuba, which is on loan from the Chicago Symphony

Figure 1. Insertions in language

Published by Duke University Press

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 215

Example 1. Mozart, Piano Sonata in C major, K. 279, III, mm. 110

without losing a sense of Mozartean elegance). That is, mm. 78 provide an

Published by Duke University Press

Published by Duke University Press

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 217

Example 3. Musical parenthesis by formal digression: Schubert four-

hands, op. 144, Lebensstrme, is broached by an insertion.12 The transition

Published by Duke University Press

Example 4. Invertible counterpoint in the recapitulation to Mozart, Piano Sonata in C major,

Published by Duke University Press

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 219

Published by Duke University Press

the parenthetical space delimited by this conventional musical rhetoric, we

Published by Duke University Press

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 221

there may be a fundamental distinction between two types of insertionthose

The cadenza as tonal parenthesis

Let us turn first to the local-level, harmonic consideration of the prototypi-

Published by Duke University Press

JMT 50:2 Job 149-2 Bribitzer-Stull Example 5a

Published by Duke University Press

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 223

Example 6. The cadenza as parenthesis: an example from Schenker (1979)

Published by Duke University Press

The Wagner tuba is the instrument (that may be disagreeable to

Figure 2. Linguistic parentheticals that mimic cadenzas

Published by Duke University Press

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 225

ing of Mozarts cadenza to the first movement of his Piano Concerto in B

Published by Duke University Press

Published by Duke University Press

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 227

remains inconclusive. In a series of articles published in this journal, David

Published by Duke University Press

Published by Duke University Press

JMT 50:2 Job 149-2 Bribitzer-Stull Example 8

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 229

cadenzas whose content can be understood as tonally parenthetical and whose

Published by Duke University Press

The cadenza as formal parenthesis

Published by Duke University Press

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 231

Western language to distinguish between the words cadence and cadenza

Published by Duke University Press

Published by Duke University Press

Matthew Bribitzer-Stull The Cadenza as Parenthesis 233