An analysis of

Ludwig van Beethoven’s

Op.18 n.4, 1st Movement

Davide Catina
Introduction

What follows is an analysis of the 1st movement of Ludwig van Beethoven’s string quartet
op. 18 n 4. The Opus 18 (consisting of six string quartets) was published in 1801, and
represents a very important work in Beethoven’s first compositional period. This collection
of quartets has been frequently associated with J. Haydn’s six “Mozart quartets” and W. A.
Mozart’s six “Haydn quartets”, and seen as a kind of “answer” or “tribute” to these two
great composers and to the mastery shown by them in this genre of music, very popular at
the time.

In this analysis, I will focus on the 1st movement, and on its form, harmony, motives and
specialties.

Follows a scheme that will clarify the main sections of the Form labeling them and indicating
key areas. After that, I will proceed discussing each section separately.
Exposition (1-77)

-1st Theme (1-13)

The piece is in the key of C minor. The first theme has the form of a sentence, with 2 bars of
presentation of the basic idea, 2 of repetition, 4 of fragmentation, 5 (4+1) of extension. In
the first 8 bars, the three top lines are standing on a tonic pedal played by the cello. The first
four bars are just a prolongation of the tonic. In bar 8, where we could expect a PAC, we find
instead an IAC, followed by an extension of five bars, based on the material of the
continuation/fragmentation of bars 5-8.

We could actually name bar 12 as an extra-extension bar, since following the expected
proportions we would have one bar less, and we would reach the PAC in bar 12. The
following thematic reconstruction shows an alternative (without extension) for bars 9-12:

Example 1

Also important to notice, that in the process of fragmentation, not only the melodic
material, but also the harmonic rhythm is speeded up (see the score for detailed analysis).

One last thing to mention: Beethoven makes a very harsh use of the so called “false
relationship” in bar 7 (cello-2nd violin) and 12 (cello-viola), a choice that (in my opinion) is
strictly connected with the character of this opening theme, very dramatic, almost operatic.
In fact, we can spot other interesting features used by Beethoven to create tension right
from the beginning of the piece, such as the use of the tonic pedal point (bars 1-6 in the
cello) that conflict with some of the chords on top of it, namely the 7th chords in bars 2/4/6
that are played on the strong beat of the bar (suspension), and the use of jumps in the
melody of the 1st violin, that are increasing their width progressively up till bar 13.
-Transition (13-33)
In bar 13 the transition starts; in the case of this piece we can speak of a “double transition”,
dividing so the transition in two parts: 13-25 (non-modulating) and 26-33 (modulating).

Following this view, we can then identify two Medial Cesuras: a very strong one in bar 25
(with a very long standing on the dominant of the key of the 1st theme), and a lighter one in
bar 33 (where the dominant of the key of the 2nd theme is reached).

In the first four bars of the 1st transition (13-16) we find a prolongation of the tonic of the
PAC with a dominant-tonic alternation, in ff dynamic and with a very recognizable pattern
(block chords) that we will find back later in the piece; anytime we will find it back, it will
never loose its melodical-rhythmical-dynamical-functional characteristics. After the Medial
Cesura in bar 25, two keys are approached (through their secondary dominants): Ab major/F
minor, respectively VI/IV in c minor and VI/II in Eb major, the key of the second theme
group.

-2nd Theme group (34-70)

The second theme, or better say second theme group, is (as often happens) longer and more
articulated then the first: we can in fact divide it in two sections, labeling them as 2A and 2B.
Theme 2A (starting in bar 34 with upbeat) presents itself like a period, of which the
antecedent and consequent are sentences in itself. It looks like this:

(2+2+4) + (2+2+4) + 4

If the first sentence (antecedent) brings us to a HC in bar 41, tonicizing the dominant, the
second one (consequent) doesn’t find relaxation in an expected PAC in Eb major; we have
instead a PAC in Bb major, key that will serve as a dominant for the section 2B. Motivically,
the theme 2A is strongly related with the first theme (see section about motivic
relationships).

Bars 49-52 are an extension of theme 2A, and they basically have the function to prolong
the dominant (Bb) preparing the IAC in bar 53, and therefore the start of theme 2B.

This new theme it’s purely sentential, following the structure:

2 (presentation) + 2 (repetition) + 4 (fragmentation / 1+1+2) + extension.

It marks a clear difference with what preceded: it’s homophonic, pure, with a strong triadic
feeling, we experience it as a fresh new start. As just said, after being extended, the theme
2B finds its relaxation in a PAC in bar 70.
- Closing section (71-77)
The closing section, very short and essential, is built on a contrast between two elements: a
new motive (upbeat to 71-74, also very triadic and homophonic) played pianissimo, and the
block chords that we found at the beginning of the transition. A small chromatic change
between the “prima” and “seconda” volta (bar 79), makes the piece go –respectively- back
to c minor or on to g minor, the first key we encounter in the development section.

Because of the “unisono” (octaves) in the four voices, this passage creates a certain
harmonic ambiguity, that will be discussed later in the section dedicated to interesting
harmonic features of the piece.

Development (78-135)

The development of this piece is quite special; we can in fact say that (at least motivically) it
is a “quasi re-exposition”. According to Hepokoski and Darcy’s theory on sonata form, we
could say that this development represent a clear example of almost complete second
rotation of the material.

The key scheme of the development section is: g minor – c minor – f (major) minor.

From bar 78 till bar 90, we find our first theme, presented here in g minor. The length of the
theme is exactly the same as the exposition (13 bars); harmonically, we have some small
changes (see score for detailed analysis).

From bar 90 till bar 111 there is a modulating section: the motivic material is borrowed from
the first theme (octave notes accompaniment in the viola, first theme incipit in the cello 90-
93 and first violin 98-101) plus a new element, very simple but very present, that acts as an
answer to the first theme incipit (91/94 first violin – 99/102 cello).

Example 2

Bars 90-94.
We assist to a fragmentation of the first theme material up till bar 105. This section of the
development (we could call it “transition”, if we look at the development as a re-exposition)
starts in g minor, and via c minor (bars 95/102) reaches f minor area (already in 102). The
key of f minor gets clearly confirmed in bar 108; starting from there, we find four bars of
alternation dominant/tonic, culminating with a gesture (that is foreshadowing the second
medial cesura of the exposition) in bar 111.

If we compare this transition with the exposition one, we see that the two important
elements present here (block chords and downwards octave notes scale –landing on
dominant- of the first violin –bars 18/19 and 106/108) are inverted.

In bar 112 the second theme comes back, this time in F major; exactly like in the exposition,
the theme has the form of a period with a consequent that doesn’t find a PAC at the end.

In the antecedent, the melody is played by the cello, while the viola takes over the bass
function. In the consequent, the first violin takes over the melody, while the other voices are
playing a pattern in my opinion strongly related with the bar in which we find the HC (119 in
the transition, 41 in the exposition), which is basically a chromatic dominant-cornering
pattern in eight notes.

Example 3

Bars 120-123.

In the exposition, the consequent was followed by theme 2B, while here it falls into the
dominant of c minor, in order to start the recapitulation. Quite peculiar for this phrase, the
fact that Beethoven uses a Major/minor effect; in fact the antecedent is in F major, while the
consequent is in f minor, that becomes therefore IV in the upcoming key of c minor.

Bars 128/135 are just a long prolongation of the dominant of c minor, alternating I6/4 and
V7.
Recapitulation (136-201)

-1st Theme (136-148)

In the recapitulation, the first theme looks pretty much the same as in the exposition;
harmonically nothing changes, beside one small detail: in bar 137-138 the subdominant (f) is
tonicized through the use of chromaticism (2nd violin).

Example 4

Bars 136-138

Motivically, in the first four bars (presentation + repetition) we find nice rhythmical
inventions in the second violin and viola; syncopations and small octave notes scales
contribute to create a more dynamic feeling than in the exposition.

-Transition (148-157)
The transition looks completely different than the exposition’s one. It’s considerably shorter,
since lots of elements are left out; in fact, the only element we found (stretched) is the block
chords of bars 13/16.

Harmonically, this transition has got an interesting feature, namely the short but important
presence of Eb minor as a key, preceded by Db Major (neapolitan of c minor).
-2nd theme group (158-194)
Also here, a part from small details due mainly to new melodical – rhythmical inventions (for
instance, take a look of bars 166-169-and see the score for detailed harmonic analysis), the
harmonic framework of the section stays the same as in the exposition.

The instrumentation is now very different: In the antecedent, first and second violin are
swapped, viola is (as in the exposition) playing broken chords and the cello has bass
function.

In the first four bars of the consequent, the 1st violin is playing a beautiful embellishment
on top of the melody (played by the 2nd violin) featuring broken chords and trills. The rest of
the section is a literal transposition of the corresponding section in the exposition.

-Closing section (194-208)

The closing section starts in bar 194 and quotes exactly the exposition for the first four bars.
Bars 198-201, as logical, bring back c minor as a key ( it’s reasonable to say that we
experience G – Ab in bars 200-201 as a deceptive cadence in c minor).

I choose as an ending of the closing section bar 208, considering bars 202/208 as an
extension of the closing section itself; we could argue instead that (since the material of
202/208 was not present in the transition of the exposition) those bars are already part of
the coda. I choose the first option because of the strong PAC in bar 208, and therefore the
harmonic weakness of bar 202.

The extension is relatively short but harmonically interesting. As in the transition of the
recapitulation, we notice the subtle presence of Eb minor as a key (upbeat to 203 till
downbeat 204) preceded by the Neapolitan of c minor. Db major is (as said) easily
explainable in c minor, but the same doesn’t apply for Eb minor; being harmonically a “far”
key, I would consider its presence as a small but meaningful statement; namely, as a
remembrance/shadow of the key of Eb major (key of the 2nd theme group) of course not
present in the recapitulation.

Follows then a sequence (bars 204-205) that brings us to IV in c minor via Bb minor, and
consequently to a cadential pattern and to the PAC in bar 208 (see score for detailed
harmonic analysis).
-Coda (208-219)
The coda confirms the key of c minor, and is relatively short. Interesting to notice, it starts
(bars 208-209) with the material of the second (modulating) transition of the exposition, that
is the only important motivic idea that was never repeated during the course of the
movement, as if “forgotten” (especially in the recapitulation, where we would expect to find
it back).

The movement finishes with a dramatic character, close to the one of the first theme; not by
chance in fact, from bar 114 we find back elements of the first theme, subjected to
fragmentation process (see section on motivic relationship).

Motivic relationships
In the following section I will compare the motives, notice the clear relationship between
them and investigate the more or less hidden similarities they have. I will proceed in the
same order I adopted for the explanation of the form.

We can spot two main melodic ideas in the first thirteen bars of the piece; one is
represented by the first two bars (repeated in bars 3 and 4 one fourth higher)

Example 5

The other one, by the fragmentation bars (5-8):

Example 6
It has a similar features when we compare it with the first four bars, like the upbeat, and the
pattern “half note-quarter note”; the only difference, is that it gets displaced (starting now
on the second beat of the bar and not on the first-sense of openness/instability); this,
together with the introduction of very expressive and dramatic jumps, contribute to create a
new sounding motive.

This motivic unit will, at least rhythmically, becomes the theme 2A:

Example 7
Bars 34-37

On the other hand, in theme 2A, we can find also affinities with the first two bar of the first
theme, namely the grace notes and the original “half note-quarter note” pattern on the
downbeat of the bar.

We can then conclude that motivically, the theme 2A represents a kind of merge/synthesis
of the two units that form the 1st theme.

The motive of bars 1-2 already sets some important thematic cells that we will encounter
later in the piece, and that will influence other motives: the fourth leap at the beginning, the
suspension on the downbeat of the second bar (d) –see harmonic analysis, and the three
eight notes upbeat to bar 2.

In the transition we can already spot some elements of this first four bars.

The block chords of bars 13-16 are based on the alternation between I
and V, all in root position, reason why the fourth leap in the cello is
extremely accentuated (example 8).

Might be speculation, but it’s interesting to notice that the fourth leap
present in the first four bars (G to C – C to F) also represents the
harmonic framework of the development section.
In the extract below we can see how the three eight note upbeat of bar 1 is presented again,
even in an accelerated version a couple of bars later (bar 24)

Example 9 / Bars 20-22

Example 10 / Bar 24

We can find the same upbeat pattern at the end of the movement, in the last bars of the
coda:

Example 11

Bars 214-219

And in the theme 2B:

Example 12 / Bars 53-55

When we take a look at bar 54, we notice that theme 2B has also something in common with
bar 5-8 (1st theme). We can then say that, as theme 2A, it has elements of the 1st theme.

What makes it sound completely different than what we heard before? I think a couple of
factors together, namely: the almost completely homophonic texture, and the absence of
wide expressive jumps. The triadic feel is instead very accentuated; feature that we find back
a little later in the piece, in the closing section.

Example 13

Bars 70-74

Interesting harmonic features

In the following section I will briefly discuss some chosen passages, their harmonic ambiguity
and their possible interpretation.

A passage of interest is the closing section, both in the exposition and recapitulation.

The harmonic understanding of the passage stays vague because of the complete absence of
chords; I will therefore propose a possible harmonic interpretation of it.

Exposition

Bars 70-74 / example 14:

Bars 74-77 (“prima volta”) / example 15:

Bars 74-77 (“seconda volta”) / example 16:

Recapitulation

I left out bars 194-198 since they are a literal transposition of bars 70-74 – see example 14

Bars 198-202 / example 17

This last extract represents the most problematic between the abovementioned ones.

Since we are in a minor key, the second scale degree is a diminished chord, and we therefore
cannot apply the model used in the other three interpretations (I-(V2)-II6). In fact, there is
not really a possibility to harmonize this passage in a stylistically correct way; we should
interpret it as a product of the transposition of a model, and we should not forget that
harmonic vagueness is a strong feature of this recapitulation closing section (take a look at
the bars that follow this passage / 202-205).
As last, I would like to briefly discuss a general topic, concerning analysis.

In quite some passages of this piece I encountered an analytical problematic; I was asking
myself how detailed show we go into labeling chords, and if it makes always sense in a
certain extend; if we should look at chords always in a functional way, or if we should
sometimes consider them as a product of voice leading and contrapuntal techniques.

To make this clear, I chose two short but explanatory examples, both belonging to theme 2B:

Example 18

Bars 53-55

Take a look at the second bar of example 18.

The analysis I choose reflects my abovementioned thoughts: Instead of labeling every

inversion of the V degree (It would be then V6 - V4/6 - V3/5 – V5/6), it rather makes more
sense to put more emphasis on the musical meaning of the cello part in this exact bar.

The melody of the cello is an arpeggiation of the dominant chord, in this particular case
written in such a way that corners the third of the chord (D) and leads then to Eb. I decided
then to keep the D as the fundamental structural note, and to see the others as
embellishments around it.
Another example, again from theme 2B:

Example 19

Bars 62-64

The problem is here represented by the chord marked (.)

When we would make an harmonic analysis of it, we would have to see it as a dominant of c
minor (V7), that doesn’t resolve on the tonic, but on the IV6 (deceptive-like resolution / V7-
IV6).

I instead chose for not labeling the chord, since I experience it not being part of c minor or as
a dominant, but as a neighboring chord (with a chromatic note – b natural) to the second
degree in Eb major.

Following the same kind of approach, we could even argue that the first time II6 appears (in
example 19 - upbeat to the second bar) would be good not to label it so, since we experience
the arrival on the first beat of bar 63 (second II6) as the real beginning of the function.