extended upbeats in the classical minuet interact

23

Extended Upbeats in the Classical Minuet: Interactions with Hypermeter and Phrase Structure

ryan mcclelland

This article considers the hypermetric properties of minuets that begin with an upbeat gesture thatspans at least one measure. Analyses of several minuets by Haydn and Mozart, and a quasi-minuetmovement by Brahms, demonstrate five types of interaction between the extended upbeat and hy-permeter. The analyses describe the evolving hypermetric structure of the minuets’ openings andthe subsequent development of this thematic material. The extended upbeat emerges in these min-uets as a key compositional element with implications for expressive meaning and performance.

Keywords: Minuet, Hypermeter, Upbeat, Anacrusis, Haydn

Recent theoretical work devotes considerable attention to rhythm and meter in tonal music.1 In analytical studies, the role of rhythmic-metric design

in shaping large-scale structure and expressive trajectory isreceiving wider recognition, especially in treatments of nine-teenth-century repertoire.2 Detailed studies of rhythmic-metric process across individual movements by Haydn orMozart are less common, perhaps reflecting the more subtledeployment of rhythmic-metric conflict in this earlier reper-toire and its typical manifestation within phrase rhythmrather than as grouping or displacement dissonances.3

The present study builds on analyses of eighteenth-century music by William Rothstein, Channan Willner, andEric McKee. Rothstein considers hypermetric—and metric—ambiguity in Beethoven’s early piano sonatas, describingpieces where periodic counterstresses permit a secondary(hyper)meter to shadow the primary (hyper)meter.4 Willnerexamines counterstress in the music of J. S. Bach.5 Hedemonstrates how a slight counterstress against the meter or hypermeter in the opening measures of a piece may shapesubsequent events—even though the counterstress is notsufficiently periodic or prominent to establish a shadow(hyper)meter. Baroque rhythmic-metric structure differs, ofcourse, from that of the late-eighteenth century, but Willner’s

Schenker [1906] 1 This article will not digress into my conception of meter, but it will become clear that I favor a relatively strict separation of rhythm frommeter, a clear distinction between (hyper)metric accents and other typesof accents (durational, tonal, stress, etc.), and a flexibly periodic sense ofhypermeter. The central theoretical works for my understanding ofrhythm and meter are Lerdahl and Jackendoff 1983, Schachter 1987,and Rothstein 1989.

2 See, for example, Cohn 1992a, Cohn 2001 (the analysis of Brahms’s“Von ewiger Liebe”), Krebs 1999, Kurth 1999, McClelland 2004a,McClelland 2004b, and Smith 2001.

3 A movement such as the minuet from Mozart’s G-minor Symphony,K. 550 is exceptional in its use of grouping dissonance (see Cohn

1992b). A recent exploration of metric process across an entire move-ment is Eric McKee’s discussion of “metrical rotations” in the finale ofMozart’s Piano Concerto in C Major, K. 467 (McKee 2004).

4 Rothstein 1995. The term shadow meter comes from Frank Samarotto,who has subsequently used the concept in published work on Beetho-ven (see Samarotto 1999). Rothstein 1995 builds upon earlier work onhypermetric conflict in Beethoven in Imbrie 1973 and Kamien 1993.

5 Willner 1998.

04.McClelland_pp23-56 3/22/06 1:25 PM Page 23

This content downloaded from 128.205.114.91 on Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:59:54 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

ideas are relevant to the present article.6 The analyses in mystudy also reveal the importance of competing hypermetriccues in tonal music and the potential of an opening phrase’shypermetric construction to invite development.

The minuet was the most important social dance of theeighteenth century, and it became the most frequent dancetype in the instrumental music of the late-eighteenth cen-tury. Eric McKee has explored the influence of the socialminuet on the minuets in Bach’s French suites.7 McKee’sdiscussion focuses on a unique characteristic of the minuet’sdance steps: its dance steps span two measures of music.8

Thus, unlike nearly all other contemporary dance music,there is a functional incentive for a minuet’s music to not onlycue the location of downbeats but also project every otherdownbeat more strongly. McKee demonstrates that Bach’sminuets often employ a specific type of phrase construction—the sentence. With their clear projection of two-measurehypermeter, Bach’s sentences, McKee argues, betray the in-fluence of the functional minuet.

In the early-eighteenth century, functional and art min-uets were relatively similar to one another. There are no up-beats in minuets from the first decades of the century (suchas those in J. S. Bach’s orchestral and keyboard suites); manyminuets of the Viennese classical style begin with a quarter-

note upbeat.9 This quarter-note upbeat is simply an anacru-sis to the downbeat that launches the minuet’s hypermeter.A small number of minuets in the instrumental music of thelate-eighteenth century, however, begin with a considerablylonger upbeat. The longer upbeat often works against the clearprojection of two-measure hypermeter that is central to thefunctional minuet. This article examines art minuets withupbeat gestures of at least one measure in length, showingdifferent ways extended upbeats can interact with hyperme-ter and shape the subsequent course of a minuet (or trio).10

With the ubiquity of minuet dancing in their milieu, late-

24 music theory spectrum 28 (2006)

6 Notably, many of Willner’s examples are from dance movements fromBach’s keyboard suites, pieces that come closer to late-eighteenth-century style than do many Baroque genres.

7 McKee 1999.8 Another discussion of this aspect of the minuet is Russell 1992.

Russell’s goal—which is quite different from McKee’s—is to debunk themyth of the 8 + 8 model for minuets propagated by some eighteenth-century theorists. He presents evidence of the danceability of minuetswith irregular phrase lengths by examining the choreographies of theseminuets in dancing manuals. Although these minuets depart from four-measure phrases and eight-measure strains, their phrases and strains always consists of an even number of measures.

9 The expanded rhythmic definition of the minuet is related to the exclu-sion of other dance types from the multi-movement instrumental worksof the late-eighteenth century. The passepied, which occurs in Baroquesuites, was faster than the minuet but shared its triple meter and wasdanced using a similar pattern of steps. The passepied began with anupbeat (quarter-note upbeat in 3/4 or eighth-note upbeat in 3/8).Popular triple-meter Austrian dances, especially Ländler, also beginwith upbeats and could explain the broader rhythmic definition of late-eighteenth-century art minuets.

10 McKee 2004 (which appeared after the present article was written)studies “anacruses of a measure or more in length” in Mozart’s instru-mental music, but most of the structures that McKee reveals differ fromthe extended upbeats I discuss. This is, in part, because McKee givesseveral examples where hyperdownbeats fall in the third or the fourthmeasure of a melodic statement. These melodic statements often haveno upbeat gesture; the first downbeat of the melodic statement simplydoes not coincide with a hyperdownbeat in the established hypermeter.The melodic statement (the grouping) is decisively out-of-phase withthe hypermeter; there is no low-level grouping boundary (or ambiguityabout the existence of such a grouping boundary) at the location of thehyperdownbeat. Only McKee’s Examples 2 and 3 (from trios in minuetmovements of Mozart’s divertimenti K. 563 and K. 439) have thestructural features of the extended upbeats I explore; these are both passages where the hyperdownbeat falls in the second measure of themelodic statement (the first measure does provide an upbeat gesture).In the categorization I develop in this article, McKee’s interpretation ofK. 563 and K. 439 places them in the second category (gestural and hypermetric extended upbeat). Except for the finale of K. 467 described

04.McClelland_pp23-56 3/22/06 1:25 PM 4



eighteenth century composers surely would have expectedlisteners to respond to these unusual minuet beginnings.11

Beginning a minuet with an unharmonized melody sug-gests the presence of an extended upbeat, but the lack of har-monization may not be absolutely necessary and certainly isnot sufficient. Example 1(a) gives the opening of the minuetmovement from Haydn’s string quartet op. 76, no. 3. Thismovement opens with a four-note figure that constitutes anextended upbeat. The trio of this movement, shown inExample 1(b), also starts with an unharmonized melody, butits effect is entirely different. The rhythmic variety and largemelodic leaps immediately cue the listener that the phraseproper is underway. Not even for a measure does the start ofthe trio possess the gestural quality of an upbeat. The pre-ceding minuet does end with a four-measure hypermeasure,thus promoting hearing the first measure of the trio as a hy-perdownbeat at the four-measure level, but even without thiscontext there is no uncertainty.

The openings in Example 1(a) and (b) constitute extremesituations along a continuum of possibilities. The start of theminuet from op. 76, no. 3 is both a gestural upbeat and a hy-permetric upbeat; the start of its trio is not an extended up-beat. In some pieces, the hypermetric and gestural interpre-tation of an opening figure changes as the music continues. Iconsider minuets with extended upbeats to fall into threemain categories:

1. Gestural, but not hypermetric, extended upbeat. In theseminuets, one momentarily infers an extended hyper-

metric upbeat, but it quickly becomes clear that theminuet’s first downbeat was a hyperdownbeat. At the-matic returns, the upbeat figure retains the gesturaland rhythmic properties of an upbeat, but it is not ahypermetric upbeat.

2. Gestural and hypermetric extended upbeat. In these min-uets, the extended upbeat is consistently heard as hy-permetrically weak. The extended upbeat may laterfunction parenthetically between hypermeasures (orpossibly expand a last—typically fourth—hyperbeat),or it may be integrated into the weak part of a hyper-measure (i.e., serve as a fourth hyperbeat).

3. Gestural and possibly hypermetric extended upbeat. Thiscategory consists of two distinct situations. In the firsttype, the upbeat gesture has a consistent hypermetricidentity, but it can be interpreted as hypermetricallyweak or as hypermetrically strong; different aspects ofthe music support each hearing. In other minuets, themusic resists either a consistently strong or weak hy-permetric hearing of the upbeat; the phrases are suffi-ciently asymmetrical to require frequent metric rein-terpretations and/or suspension of hypermeter.

Two additional situations arise in the minuet repertoire, al-beit infrequently:

4. Gestural extended upbeat that later becomes a hypermetricextended upbeat. These minuets begin like those in thefirst category, but at a subsequent thematic return thelatent potential in the opening material is channeledinto a hypermetric extended upbeat.

5. Hypermetric extended upbeat emerges from non-upbeatgesture. Subsequent events challenge the listener toinfer an extended upbeat even though the openingmaterial does not possess the gestural qualities of anupbeat.

The balance of this article explores each of these categoriesin turn, with the third category receiving the most attention.

extended upbeats in the classical minuet: interactions with hypermeter and phrase structure 25

above in note 3, the extended anacruses McKee studies are a consistentfeature of a thematic section; they are not subject to the ambiguitiesand reinterpretations found in most of my examples.

11 Gretchen Wheelock approaches Haydn’s minuets as a conscious playwith the conventions of the minuet and argues that contemporary lis-teners would have recognized Haydn’s witticisms. Although Wheelockdoes address some metric issues, especially parenthetical insertions, shedoes not mention the presence of extended upbeats as an element ofHaydn’s topical play. See Wheelock 1992, especially 55–89.




Mozart’s minuets occasionally begin with extended upbeats,but most of my examples come from Haydn’s minuets, espe-cially those in the string quartets.12 Beethoven’s minuetsrarely have extended upbeats; this hypermetric play occurs in

his scherzos. The opening of the scherzo from the SeventhSymphony is a celebrated example, but similar hypermetricmanipulation is evident already in the scherzos from thepiano trios op. 1, no. 1 and op. 1, no. 2. The inclusion of ex-tended upbeats in Beethoven’s earliest published scherzossuggests an evolutionary link between the minuets exploredin this article and the nineteenth-century scherzo, but exam-ination of this relationship requires a separate study. Thepresent article considers one nineteenth-century piece: the“Allegretto quasi Menuetto” movement from Brahms’s E-minor cello sonata. Brahms’s movement takes the extendedupbeat as its guiding compositional idea, incorporating andreshaping features from its Classical antecedents.


12 The compositional language in Haydn’s string quartets tends to bemore complex than in his symphonies. Floyd Grave has studied tempo-rary changes in projected meter in Haydn and found the string quartetshave the greatest frequency of metric dissonances, followed by the sym-phonies, solo keyboard sonatas, keyboard trios, and lastly the barytontrios (see Grave 1995, 201). William Rothstein asserts that phraserhythm is more adventurous in Haydn’s string quartets than in his sym-phonies, though the difference is greatest in works composed before1780 or after 1790 (see Rothstein 1989, 131).

Š

Ý

/0

/0 ¼

Ł

ÿ

Ł Ł Ł

ŁŁðŁ

lll

ŁŁŁ

lll

¼

Ł¼

ŁŁðŁ

lll

ŁŁŁ

lll

¼

Ł¼

ðŁŁ ðý ý

Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁ Ł

ŁðŁŁ

ŁŁ¼

¼¼Ł !

a gestural upbeat

1 2 3 4

(a) Haydn, String Quartet op. 76, no. 3, iii, 1–5

(b) Haydn, String Quartet op. 76, no. 3, iii, start of trio

example 1. Unharmonized beginnings.

ŠÝ

/0/0 ¼

Ł\

ÿ

ð Ł

ÿð Ł

ðððŁ

ýý² Ł Ł Ł Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

¼Ł

¼

Łÿ

ð Ł

ÿð Ł

ðððŁ

ýýý

²² Ł Ł Ł² Ł

ŁŁŁŁ²

¼

¼ (

( !

NOT a gestural upbeat

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4




gestural extended upbeats

The first category of extended upbeat in the minuetrepertoire is an upbeat gesture that does not delay the firsthyperdownbeat. The minuet from Mozart ’s “Dissonance”string quartet, K. 465, provides a good illustration; Example2 gives a short score with hypermetric annotations. Thestepwise motion and continuous eighth notes of the unhar-monized violin line create an upbeat gesture that leads to theC5 of m. 2. That this C5 is not a hyperdownbeat is first inti-mated by its harmonization: submediant rather than tonic.The hypermetric strength of m. 1 is further confirmed by therest on the second beat of m. 4, the change of motivic mater-ial for mm. 5–8, and the clear division of mm. 5–8 into two-measure units through repetition. The hypermetric structureis sealed by the forceful beginning of a sequential passage atm. 9, and the remainder of the first reprise clearly delineatesfour-measure groups.13 A particularly beautiful detail is thevariant of m. 1 that sounds in m. 15 as the minuet approachesan authentic cadence in the key of the dominant; this variantoccurs in a measure that is hypermetrically strong comparedto the following measure, recalling the hypermetric relation-ship between mm. 1–2.

When the opening returns at m. 40, it does so after a suc-cession of four-measure hypermeasures (mm. 21–24, 24–27,28–31, 32–35, and 36–39). The only hypermetric irregularityin the second reprise occurs at m. 24, where an elisionchanges a fourth hyperbeat into a hyperdownbeat. This typeof elision is particularly common, and in this instance it re-sults from the tonal surprise of m. 24. An A is expected onthe downbeat of m. 24 to complete the repetition of theopening idea in D minor, but instead a jarring B ♭ interjectsand initiates a four-measure group that ultimately leads toA. Besides having a periodic hypermetric preparation, the

thematic return is preceded by hypermetrically strong adum-brations of the upbeat gesture (see especially mm. 28, 30, 34,36, and 38). The four-measure expansion of the dominant arrival (mm. 36–39) not only provides the conventional pro-longation of the home dominant before the thematic returnbut solidifies the hypermetrically strong placement of theupbeat gesture by making two hypermetrically strong state-ments of this gesture its sole melodic content. This clarifica-tion is particularly apt after the conjoined statements of thismotive in the three measures preceding the dominant arrival(mm. 32–34). After the thematic return, the hypermetricstructure repeats that of the first reprise (with an additionalrepetition of the final four measures). Mozart acknowledgesthe special quality of the opening measure through the imi-tations in the viola and cello in mm. 41–42, but these imita-tions have no impact on hypermeter or phrase structure.

The trio of K. 465 reinforces the hypermetric identity ofthe minuet’s upbeat in two ways. The trio proceeds entirelyin four-measure hypermeasures, providing a metric contextinto which a hypermetrically accented understanding of theminuet’s first measure will re-enter smoothly. In addition,the second reprise of the trio recalls the minuet’s openingmotive. In the dominant prolongation before the thematicreturn, a turn figure that emphasizes F ♯ passes between theviolins (Example 3). Although this turn figure does not ex-actly replicate the minuet’s opening motive, it is not motivi-cally related to the eighth-note figures heard earlier in thetrio; elsewhere in the trio, eighth-note figures are restrictedto repeated-note accompaniments in the viola and second violin. The hypermetric placement of these turn figures issignificant. The most salient iterations—those in the higherregister—occur in hypermetrically stronger measures. Thus,like the motivic recalls in the minuet, these turn figures rein-force a hypermetrically strong interpretation of the gesturalupbeat.

Some readers may be uneasy with my references to a hy-permetrically strong figure as a gestural upbeat. There aretwo points to keep in mind. First, on an initial hearing of the


13 I refer to the two repeated parts of a minuet as the first reprise and sec-ond reprise. I refer to the restatement of the opening material duringthe second reprise as the thematic return.





ŠÝ

/0/0 ¼

Ł\

Ł

ÿ

Ł² Ł Ł Ł Ł¦ Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

\ ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

¼

¼

ŁŁ[

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¼

¼

¼

ŁŁ\

Ł

ÿŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł Ł

Ł Ł

ÿðŁ Ł² Ł¦ Ł Ł

Ł Ł

Š

Ý ÿ

Ł Ł[

Ł² ŁŁ¦² Ł ŁŁ ŁŁŁ¼

Ł² Ł

ŁŁ¦

²

Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł ŁŁ

Ł¼Ł² ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¦

²

Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

²

²

Ł ððððð

ýý

ýý

²[̂

ŁŁŁŁ

\Ł

l

¼

Ł¼

²l Łl

¼

Ł¼

l Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁl

Łl

¼

Ł¼

l Ł² l

¼

Ł¼

l Łl

ÿŁ

ŁŁ ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ²² ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ¦¦ ŁŁ²

Ł¼

ŁŁ

¼

¼

ŁŁŁŁ Ł

ŁŁŁŁ Ł

¼

Ł¼ Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ²

Ł

ŠÝ ŁŁ

ŁŁ Ł

¼

Ł¼Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ Ł

ŁŁŁŁ Ł

¼

Ł¼ Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

²Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

¼

¼ (

(

(

( ŁŁ

²²[ Ł

ŁŁŁ

²²

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

−−

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¦¦

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ððŁ

ýý−−− ¼ Ł²

\Ł

ððŁð

ý

ý−\

Ł¦ Ł Ł²ŁŁ Ł²

ŁŁŁŁ

¼ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁ¼

ŁŁ

Š

Ý ŁŁ¼

ŁŁ²

¼ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

ŁŁ

² Ł ðŁ

ððý

ý

²

¦²Ł Ł− Ł Ł

Ł

² Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

¼

Ł¼

¼Ł¼Ł

Ł ðŁ

ððý

ý

²

−

Ł Ł Ł Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

¼

Ł¼

¼Ł¼Ł Ł

ÿððŁ² Ł Ł− Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

²

¦− Ł

ÿððŁ Ł Ł Ł

Ł

ŁŁ Ł²

¼ŁðŁ² Ł

ŁŁ

Ł Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

²

¦ ŁŁ

Š

Ý ŁŁ

ðŁ ý

Ł¼¼

¼ŁŁ

ŁŁ−

¼Ł

ðŁ ý

²¦

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł¦ Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

Ł¼

Ł¼

¼Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł−

¼Ł

ðŁ ý

²

¦

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

¦ Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ[ Ł²

¼

Ł¼ Ł¦

¼

ŁŁ[

ŁŁ

¼

ŁŁ²² ŁŁ

¼

ŁŁ ŁŁ

¼Ł

ŁŁ

²

¦¦[ Ł

ŁŁ

¼Ł

ŁŁ

² Ł Ł¼

ŁŁ− Ł Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

¦

[ŁŁ ŁŁ

ŁŁ

² Ł ŁŁŁŁ

Ł ŁŁŁŁ

¦ Ł

!

!

!

!

!

9

18

27

35

8va

8va

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4 1 2 3

(recalls m. 1)

4 1

2 3 4 1 2 3 4 = 1 2 3

4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3

4 (expanded 1 2 3 4) 1 2 3

Allegro

example 2. Mozart, String Quartet K. 465, iii, 1–42: a gestural—but not hypermetric—extended upbeat.




opening of a minuet such as the one from K. 465, the loca-tion of the first hyperdownbeat is momentarily unclear.Second, and more critically, I have been referring to this motive as a gestural upbeat, not a metric upbeat. This motivepossesses the rhythmic and melodic properties of an upbeatgesture, even though it is deployed in strong-weak hyperme-tric configurations. Each time the strongest metric accentfalls on the motive’s third note, but the rhythmic momentumcontinues to the durational accent that comes at the down-beat of the next measure. Although these successive itera-tions are in no way hypermetric upbeats, they have a rhyth-mic directedness that has an upbeat gestural quality. Thissituation reveals something that is lost if one conceives ofmeter as rhythm rather than viewing meter and rhythm asseparate, interacting entities.

gestural and hypermetric extended upbeats

The second type of extended upbeat in the minuet reper-toire consists of a gestural upbeat that actually is a hyper-metric upbeat. Here I consider two contrasting examples: thetrio from the minuet movement of Mozart’s string quartet,K. 575 and the second movement of Brahms’s cello sonata,op. 38. In the Mozart, the upbeat stands apart from the un-derlying hypermeter; in the Brahms, the upbeat sometimes

stands apart from the underlying hypermeter, but usually isintegrated.

The pitch material of the upbeat in the K. 575 trio is sim-ilar to that of the minuet from the “Dissonance” quartet, butthe upbeat spans an additional measure. Example 4 suggeststhat the hypermetric interpretation of the upbeat in K. 575 isentirely different. In the trio’s third measure, the cello enterswith a four-measure antecedent phrase; after a return of thetwo-measure upbeat, the cello provides a four-measure con-sequent phrase. The two iterations of the upbeat gesturestand apart from the hypermetric regularity of the eight-measure parallel period. The first reprise of this trio does notconsist of two six-measure hypermeasures, each organized asthree pairs of measures; nor is hypermeter above the two-measure level inoperative. A more appropriate interpretationis two four-measure hypermeasures, each of which is precededby an elongated upbeat. Because of the clear gestural contrastbetween the upbeat figures and the antecedent-consequentmelodies, it is not difficult to hear the elongated upbeats andthe underlying periodicity of four-measure hypermeter.14 Inthis instance, the elongated upbeat before the consequentphrase simply suspends hypermetric counting; it does not


14 The same interpretation of the start of the K. 575 trio is advocated inRothstein 1989, 39–40.

Š

Ý

−−−

−−− ŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł¼

Ł

Ł

Ł¼

ŁŁ\

Ł

Ł

¼Ł

ŁŁ¦

²\

Ł

Ł¦ŁŁ

Ł¼

\ŁŁ

Ł¼

ŁŁ¦

ŁŁ

¼ŁŁŁ

²¦

Ł

Ł

¦

²ŁŁ

Ł¼

² Ł

Ł

Ł¼

Ł Ł²[

Ł

Ł

¼Ł

ðŁ

²¦[ Ł

Ł¦ ŁŁ

Ł

[ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¦ Ł

Ł¼Ł¼² Ł

Ł¼ŁŁ\

ŁŁŁŁŁ

¦²

\\

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł¼

¦

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ¦² Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¦

Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¦Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¦

² Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ¦ Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¦² Ł

ŁŁŁ¼¦

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¼Ł

ŁŁ

Ł¼

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ !

83

4 1 2 3 4 1

cf. m. 1

2 3

cf. m. 1

4 1

example 3. Mozart, String Quartet K. 465, iii, 83–92: hypermetrically strong recalls of upbeat motive.





Ý

ŠšŠ

²

²²

/0/0/0

ŁŁ²²\¼¼

ŁŁ ŁŁ

ÿÿ

ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ

ÿÿ

ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁl

Ł\ð

Łl

Łl¼

Łl Łl¼Ł Ł

Łl

Ł Ł

ŁlŁŁ

Łl Łl¼Ł

Łl Łl¼Ł

Łl ŁlŁð

Łl Łl¼

Łl Łl

ŁŁ

Łl Ł

ŁŁ

¼Ł

¼

ŁŁ²²

¼¼

ŁŁ ŁŁ

ÿÿ

ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ

ÿÿ

ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ ŁŁ$

%Šš

Š

²²²

ŁŁl

Łð

Łl

Łl¼

Łl Łl¼Ł Ł

Łl

Ł Ł

ŁlŁŁ

Łl Łl¼Ł

Łl Łl¼Ł

Łl Łlð ýð

Łl Łl Łl Łl

Ł

Łl

Ł

ŁŁŁ

¼¼¼

( (( (( (

¼¼Ł

ŁlŁ² ð ý

Łl Łl¼

Łl Łl¼

Łl ŁlŁð

Łl Łl¼

Łl Łl¼Ł

Łl Łlð ýð²

Łl Ł² l Łl Łl

Ł

Łl ŁlŁŁ

Łl Łl¼¼

Łl Łl¼¼

Łl$

%

Šš

Š

²

²

²

ŁlŁ²ð ý

Łl Łl¼

Łl Łl¼

Łl ŁlŁŁ

Łl

Ł

Łl¼Ł

Łl

Ł

Łl¼Ł

Łl

Ł

Łlð ýð²

Łl Ł² l Łl Łl

Ł

Łl

Ł

ŁlŁŁ

Łl Łl¼

¼

Łl Łl¼

Ł

Łl ¼Łlð ýð ý

Łl ŁŁl

Łl Ł

Łl

Łl

¼Łlð ýð ý²

Łl Ł

Ł²l

Łl ŁŁ²

lŁl

¼Łlð ýð ý

Łl

ŁŁl

Łl Ł

Łl

Łl

¼Łlð ý²ð ý¦

Łl

ŁŁ

¦l

Łl Ł

Ł¦l

Łl

¼Łlð ýð²

Łl

ŁŁ

²l

Łl Ł

Ł²l

Ł Ł

Łl

Ł Ł

$

%

Š

š

Š

²

²²

¼Ł² lð ýð

Łl Ł

Łl

Łl

ŁŁ²l

Ł

Łl

ŁŁ\Łð ý

Ł ŁŁ

¼Ł ŁŁ

¼Ł ŁŁ

ÿð

Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ

Ł²\

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł\Ł Ł

¼

¼Ł Ł

¼

¼Ł Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ Ł

¼

¼Ł Ł

¼

¼Ł Ł

ð¼ŁlŁ

ŁlŁŁl¼

ŁlŁŁ

Łl¼

Ł ŁŁl

Ł Ł¼ŁlŁ

ŁlŁŁŁl¼

ŁlŁŁ

Łl¼

Łl

ð¼ŁlŁ

Łl

Ł

Łl¼

Łl

ŁŁ

Łl¼

ŁŁ

Łl

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

¼

¼

¼

¼Ł²

¼

Ł$

%

74

83

91

100

Vln. 1Vln. 2

Va.

Vc.

Antecedent phrase

1(hypermetric upbeat) 2 3 4 (hypermetric upbeat)

Vln. 1Vln. 2

Va.

Vc.

Consequent phrase

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Vln. 1Vln. 2

Va.

Vc.

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1

Vln. 1Vln. 2

Va.

Vc.

2 3

5th progression

4 (hypermetric upbeat)

(5th progression)

Vln. 2

1

Vln. 1

2 3 4

cresc.

cresc.

example 4. Mozart, String Quartet K. 575, iii, start of trio: a gestural and hypermetric extended upbeat.




expand the fourth hyperbeat from the end of the consequentphrase. In the middle of a composition, an extended hyper-metric upbeat that stands apart from the main hypermetersometimes has more of the quality of an expansion of theprevious hyperbeat than a hypermetric parenthesis. This is asubtle distinction, but one that I find musically meaningful.

In the second reprise, Mozart maintains the separatenessof the upbeat figures from a highly symmetrical underlyingphrase design. The second reprise begins with a sixteen-measure sentence that closes on the dominant.15 The secondreprise closes with a restatement of the music from the firstreprise with changes in register and instrumentation; thehigh melody eventually is played by the instrument that itought to have been played by—the first violin. The juncturebetween the end of the sixteen-measure sentence and the startof the thematic return receives special treatment. The end ofthe sentence would permit the antecedent phrase to beginimmediately at the end of the sentence, as indicated in therecomposition in Example 5. Not only does Mozart insertthe two-measure upbeat, but he adds an accompaniment to the upbeat. Adding an accompaniment could easily lend hypermetric strength to the upbeat gesture, but a pitch rela-tionship between the new accompaniment and the end of theprevious sentence prevents such strengthening. In the hypo-thetical recomposition shown in Example 5, a bracket showsa foreground fifth-progression from D to G (which embell-ishes the earlier middleground interruption). In Mozart’s ver-sion, the top notes of the added accompaniment are B and A,expanding the fifth-progression across the extended upbeat,as shown by the bracket above the score in Example 4. Based

on the content of the last measure of the sentence, a melodicarrival on G4 is implied; the upbeat gesture’s entrance in themidst of a fifth-progression towards this strongly impliedgoal solidifies the upbeat’s end-accented hypermetric iden-tity.16 The fifth-progression within the upbeat gesture is thusencompassed by the larger fifth-progression and is com-pleted at the same point. These motivic parallelisms have aparticularly beautiful effect due to their placement in thesame register and the general prominence of B4 and A4 in themeasures immediately before and after the thematic return.Nesting the upbeat gesture within a larger fifth-progressiondelicately adjusts its musical effect; although it is clearlyleading towards a hyperdownbeat, it is slightly less disjunct—less obviously parenthetical—than elsewhere.

The Allegretto quasi Menuetto of Brahms’s cello sonata,op. 38 also has a hypermetrically weak extended upbeat, butthat upbeat is more integrated with the minuet’s underlyinghypermetric and tonal structures. Example 6 gives the scoreof the first reprise. The hypermetric orientation at the begin-ning is made clear by the interaction between piano andcello. The cello’s melody opens with a quarter-note upbeat inits most common pitch realization: a leap from 5̂ up to 1̂. Theextended upbeat in the piano part is a preparation for thecello’s conventional beginning. The first reprise consists of asingle phrase (mm. 2–10) that is elaborated not only by theextended upbeat but also by a post-cadential phrase expan-sion, or suffix. The suffix recalls the motive from the piano’sextended upbeat, a motive hinted at already by the cello inm. 9. Each of these motivic recalls is situated in a hyper-metrically weak measure. To achieve this hypermetric place-ment, the underlying phrase is nine measures long. With


16 It is important to understand that the root-position G-major chordthat supports the return of the upbeat gesture is not a structural tonicarrival. This G-major chord is subsidiary to the dominant harmonieson either side; it functions like a neighboring six-four chord, but thebass moves. The melodic fifth-progression clarifies the harmonicmeaning of this G-major chord.

15 One might construe these sixteen measures as two four-measurephrases followed by an eight-measure phrase. Given the sequential re-lationship of the two four-measure units and the subsequent shorteningof melodic units and acceleration of harmonic rhythm, I find the six-teen-measure sentence more satisfactory. In addition, the interpretationof this passage as a single sentence better reflects the stunning simplic-ity of the underlying phrase structure in this trio.





Ý

Š

š

Š

²

²²

¼Łlð ýð

Łl

ŁŁl

Łl Ł

Łl

Ł Ł

Łl

Ł Ł

¼Ł² lð ýð

Łl Ł

Łl

Łl

ŁŁ²l

Ł

Łl

ŁŁ

Łð ý

Ł ŁŁ

¼

Ł ŁŁ

¼

Ł ŁŁ

ÿð ý

Ł ŁŁ Ł ŁŁ Ł ð¼ŁlŁ

Łl

Ł

Łl¼

ŁlŁŁ

Łl¼

Ł Ł

Łl

Ł Ł¼

ŁlŁ

ŁlŁŁ

Łl¼

Łl

ŁŁ

Łl¼

Łl

ð¼ŁlŁ

Łl

Ł

Łl¼

Łl

ŁŁ

Łl¼

ŁŁ

Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¼

¼¼

¼Ł²

¼

Ł

$

%1 2 3

5th progression

4

Thematic return

1 2 3 4

example 5. Thematic return recomposed without upbeat gesture.

Š

š

Ý

Ý

Ý

ŠÝ

/0/0/0

¼

ŁŁŁ

l

l

\ ŁŁŁ

l

l¼

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ¼

ŁŁŁ

l

lŁl

\

ŁŁŁ

l

lŁ ý

ðŁ

ðŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

l

lŁl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

lŁl Ł²

ðŁ

ðŁ

Ł

Ł

Łl

Ł

Ł

l

l

Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

lŁ ý

ðŁ

ðŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

l

lŁl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

lŁl Ł

ðŁ¼Ł

Ł

Ł

−

−

Łl

Ł

ŁŁ

l

lŁl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

lŁ ý

ðŁ

ðŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

l

lŁl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

lŁl Ł ý

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

lŁ² l Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

lŁl

š

Š

Š

Ł ý

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

²

²

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

lŁl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

lŁl Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

²

²

l

l

Ł Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

lŁl

ŁŁŁŁŁl

lð

ðŁŁ

ðŁŁŁŁŁŁ

²²

Łl

¼

¼

Łl Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

²²

ll

Ł Łl

ŁŁŁŁll

Łl

ŁŁŁŁŁll

ð

ðŁŁ

ðŁŁŁŁŁŁ

²²

Ł

ŁŁŁll

Ł ð

ðŁðŁ

ŁŁ

²

Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

lll

Ł ð

ðŁðŁ

ŁŁ

²

Łl\

¼

¼

Łl Ł

¼

¼

Ł Łl

¼

¼

Łl

ŁŁŁ

l

l\

!

!

8

hypermetric upbeat 1 2 3 4 1 2

3

hypermetrically weak recalls of m. 1

4 1 2 3 4 (4) hypermetric upbeat

phrase suffix facilitates reentry of hypermetric upbeat for written-out repeat of first reprise

dolce

Allegretto quasi Menuetto

example 6. Brahms, Cello Sonata op. 38, ii, 1–15: a gestural and hypermetric upbeat.




their repetition of a two-measure thematic idea, mm. 2–5suggest the beginning of an eight-measure sentence. Ex-ample 7 offers a hypothetical recomposition of mm. 2–10 asan eight-measure sentence. The penultimate measure recallsthe extended upbeat motive, but in an eight-measure phrasethis recall occurs in a hypermetrically strong measure at thetwo-measure level. An extra measure at the start of the sec-ond half of the phrase is necessary to incorporate the returnof the upbeat motive without altering its hypermetric context.

When the opening material returns, it is modified toreach an authentic cadence, but it retains its original hyper-metric organization. In Example 8, the hypermeter abovethe score shows the relation of Brahms’s music to the hyper-measures of an eight-measure sentence. The annotationsbelow the score show the surface hypermeter created throughexpansions. The sentence first undergoes a one-measure ex-pansion (made particularly clear by the near-repetition of m.66), so that the upbeat gesture in m. 67 again falls in a weakmeasure in the surface hypermeter. Brahms then avoids aconvincing close in m. 68, extending the phrase through rep-etitions of the cadence. These repetitions culminate in m. 74with a return of the upbeat figure at its original pitch level.This last iteration of the upbeat figure falls in a weak mea-sure of the surface hypermeter, and its tonal meaning has

been clarified through the left-hand harmonization. As indi-cated by the reading of the underlying hypermeter, mm.71–74 are an expanded version of m. 67, the measure that re-ferred to the upbeat motive. By slowing down the harmoniesof m. 67, Brahms reintroduces the upbeat motive in its origi-nal form, bringing the process of motivic development fullcircle. Significantly, this recall is integrated into the surfacehypermeter (as a fourth hyperbeat).17

Unlike the previous Mozart examples, Brahms’s move-ment makes the extended upbeat a central feature of boththe minuet and the trio. The relationship is particularly evi-dent since the trio’s upbeat (Example 9) is a loose transposi-tion of the minuet’s; ♯4̂ substitutes for the diatonic version.18

Hypermetrically, the trio’s upbeat functions like that in Mo-zart K. 575 by standing apart from the ongoing four-measure


17 This integration is slightly obscured by the hemiolas in mm. 71–72 and73–74.

18 The motion between scale-degrees 6–5 in minor that is featured at thestart of the upbeats relates to the sonata’s first movement. In the open-ing theme of the first movement, the cello’s first melodic apex is on C,and that C resolves directly to B. Even after the first movement shiftsto the major mode, the coda repeatedly reemphasizes the motion fromC natural to B (e.g., mm. 263, 264, 265–66); in fact, the final threepitches in the bass line are C, B, and E (mm. 276–81).

Ý

Ý

ŠŠ

/0/0/0

Ł

¼¼

Ł ý

ðŁ

ðŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Łl

lŁl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁl

lŁl Ł²

ðŁ

ðŁ

Ł

Ł

Łl

Ł

Łl

l

Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁl

lŁ ý

ðŁ

ðŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Łl

lŁl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁl

lŁl Ł

ðŁ¼Ł

Ł

Ł

−

−

Łl

Ł

ŁŁl

lŁl

ŁŁ

ŁŁl

lŁ ý

ðŁ

ðŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Łl

lŁl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁl

l

Łl Ł ý

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁl

lŁl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁl

lŁl Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

²

²

l

lŁ Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

lŁl

ŁŁŁŁŁll

ð

ŁŁŁðŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

²² !

1 2 3 4 1 2

recall of upbeat gesturehypermetrically strong

3 4

example 7. Recomposition of mm. 2–10 as an eight-measure sentence.




hypermeter; Example 10 extracts Brahms’s bass line andgives hypermetric annotations.19 Unlike K. 575, subsequent


19 Repetition creates one-measure phrase expansions in mm. 83–84 and94–95. These expansions, like the one in mm. 71–74 of the minuet,make use of hemiola. Although hemiola is quite frequent in Brahms’smusic, these hemiolas have melodic figures that relate motivically to theupbeat gesture. Further, in the minuet, the four beats of the upbeat ges-ture divide into two-beat units based on rhythmic differentiation; in thetrio, the upbeat consists of two-beat units separated by silence. It shouldbe noted that the hypermetric meaning of a hemiola depends on its

77777 777777 777

Š

š

Ý

Ý

Ý

ŠÝ

¼

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ¼

ŁŁŁ

l

lŁl

\

ŁŁŁ

l

lŁ ý

ŁŁŁ

\ŁŁ

¹

ŁŁ

Łl

ŁŁ¹

Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ-ll

Łl

Ł

¹l

Ł²

Ł

ŁŁ

²

ŁŁ

Łl

¹

ŁŁŁŁ¹

Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ-ll

Ł

¹l

Ł ý

ŁŁŁ ŁŁ

¹

ŁŁ

Łl

ŁŁ¹

Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ-ll

Łl

Ł

¹l

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ ŁŁ−

Łl

¹

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¹

−

Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ-

l

l

Ł

¹

l

Ł ý

Ł

ŁŁ Ł

¹

ŁŁŁl

Ł

¹

Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ-l

Łl

Ł

¹

l

Ł ý

Ł

ŁŁ

−

Ł

¹

ŁŁ

Ł² l

Ł

¹

Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ-l

Łl

Ł

¹

l

Ł ý

Ł

ŁŁ Ł

¹

ŁŁ

Ł² l

Ł

¹

Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ-l

Ł² l

Ł

¹

l

Ł

Ł

¹

l\

Ł

ŁŁŁ-l

Łl

Ł

¹

lŁŁŁ-l

Łl

Ł¹l

ŁŁŁ-² l

š

Š

Ý

ð\

ŁŁŁ¹ ŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

Ł

²ŁŁŁ²

Łl

¼

¼

Łl Ł

Ł

¹

l

Ł

ŁŁŁ-l

Łl

Ł

¹

l

ŁŁŁ-l

Łl

Ł¹l

ŁŁŁ-² l

Ł

ŁŁŁ¹ ŁŁŁ

Łl

ŁŁŁ

Ł

²

Łl

ŁŁŁ²

Łl

¼

¼

Łl Ł\

Ł

¹

l\

Ł

ŁŁŁ.

l

Ł² l

Ł

¹

l

ŁŁŁ.² l

Ł¦

Ł

¹

² l

Ł

ŁŁŁ.

−¦ l

Łl

Ł

¹

l

ŁŁŁ.

l

Ł−

Ł

¹

− l

Ł

ŁŁŁ.− l

Łl

Ł

¹

lŁŁŁ

.l

Łl

Ł

¹

² lŁŁŁ

.

¼

¼

¼

Łl

ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

l

\ŁŁl

¼

¼

ŁŁ ŁŁ

ŁŁŁ²

ŁŁŁŁŁŁ

² l

l¼

¼

ŁŁl

ŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁŁ

l

l¼

¹

¼

Ł-l

ŁŁŁ²

Ł

ŁŁ²

l

l

ŁŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł

l

l

¼

¼

¼

!

!

59

68

Surfacehypermeter

hypermeterUnderlying 1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

1

1

2expansion by chromaticized repetition

2 3

3

4

4

1

expansion by repetition

(3

2

4)

3

(3m. 67 (= m. 69) expanded to four measures through harmonic embellishment

4(=1 2 3

chords clarify tonal meaning

upbeat gesture from m. 1

4)

pizz.

4

1

)

example 8. Brahms, Cello Sonata op. 38, ii, 59–76: upbeat motive in weak measures of surface hypermeter.

tonal content and on its context. In Brahms’s trio, the hemiolas in mm.101–02 and 105–06 do not expand a single hyperbeat in the underlyinghypermeter; the hemiolas are rhythmic dissonances against completelyperiodic hypermeter. Willner 1991 considers the relationship of hemio-las to tonal rhythm, classifying hemiolas as cadential, expansion, orcontraction according to whether the pacing of tonal events is basicallyunchanged, slowed down, or accelerated. Because Handel’s music gen-erally does not have the hypermetric periodicity of late-eighteenth-century music, Willner 1991 tracks changes in tonal pacing rather thanhypermeter, but one can extrapolate from Willner’s categories the im-pact on hypermeter when hypermeter is relevant.




returns of the upbeat gesture are more like expansions offourth hyperbeats rather than parentheses due to smoothshifts from suffix to prefix function. An exceptional featureof the trio is the reworking of the thematic material at thetonal return, which is included in Example 11. F ♯ minor is

reasserted at m. 101 after three measures of dominant prepa-ration, but the structural upper line is entirely reconceived.As indicated in the voice-leading sketch in Example 12, thepiano’s upper line no longer remains on 5̂; instead, the upbeatmotive is altered to accommodate a descent to 3̂ at the tonal


Ý

ŠÝ

²²²

²²²

²²²

/0

/0/0

¼

Ł

ŁŁ\

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ÿ

Ł

ŁŁ

²

² ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¼

¼Ł

ŁŁ ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¼

Ł

ŁŁ

²

² ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¼

¼

¼

Ł

¼

ŁŁ Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

(

(

(

Ł²

Ł

ŁŁ² Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł¦

Ł

ŁŁ¦ Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ Ł

Ł²

Ł

ŁŁ²

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

²

Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ¦ Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

²

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

²

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

²Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁ

!

76

hypermetric upbeat

6̂ 5̂ ²4̂ 5̂

arco

1 2 3

espress.

espress.

col Ped.

legato

example 9. Brahms, Cello Sonata op. 38, ii, start of trio: tonal and hypermetric design of upbeat same as in minuet.

Ý ²²² /0ð ý ð ý ( ð ý ð ý ð ý ð ý ð² Ł Ł ð ð² Ł¦ ð Ł ð ý ð ý ð ý ( ( ð ý ð ý ð ý

Ý ²²² ð ý ð¦ Ł Ł ð¦ ð Ł² ð Ł² ð ý ð ý ð ý ð Ł¦ Ł ð ð Ł ð ý ð Ł¦ Ł ð ð Ł ð ý (

77

93

( )

upbeat

I

1

²65

2

²43

3

6

4

65

1

43

6

2

6 ²6V

3

7² ¦

4upbeat

1

65

2

43

3

6

4

42

1

6 6 64

2

7

3

7 8²

4upbeat

7 5

1

6

2

¦ 6

3

7²

4

5

1

6

2

¦ 6

3

7²

4

(V)4

I III

V I V I V I

example 10. Hypermetric analysis showing subsequent extended upbeats at ends of hypermeasures.




return. The cello, which had doubled the piano’s upper lineat the start of the trio, emphasizes 5̂ at the start of m. 101,but in an inner voice; when the cello line rises to prominenceat m. 103 it too has reached 3̂. Thus, although the upbeatgestures remain separate from the four-measure hypermeter,their pitch content participates in the trio’s descent from itsKopfton. There is thus a curious interplay between hypermet-ric and tonal value at the tonal return. Brahms, always awareof and transcending historical precedent, has taken the ex-tended upbeat of Haydn and Mozart and deployed it in anew way.

gestural and possibly hypermetric extended upbeats

In all of the preceding pieces, it has been clear whetherthe extended upbeat gesture is hypermetrically accented orunaccented. In many minuets, however, this is not the case.In some minuets, the upbeat gesture seems as though itcould begin a hypermeasure or immediately precede a hyper-downbeat. The hypermetric identity of the upbeat gesture isambiguous, at least for a significant stretch of music. In otherminuets, there is sufficient irregularity in the phrase structure

to require constant reinterpretation of the hypermetric place-ment of the upbeat gesture or suspension of hypermeter.

Consider the trio of the third movement of Haydn’sSymphony 53, given in Example 13. The pitch content ofthe upbeat gesture in this trio is similar to that of the minuetfrom Mozart’s “Dissonance” quartet. In Mozart’s minuet,the following music quickly clarifies that the gestural upbeatis not a hypermetric upbeat. In the trio of Haydn’s sym-phony, the phrase design is unusually symmetrical with theupbeat gesture recurring every four measures. Thus, it is pos-sible to interpret Haydn’s minuet in two ways: with hyper-downbeats at mm. 43, 47, 51, etc. or at mm. 44, 48, 52, etc.In the former reading, the upbeat gesture begins a hyper-measure; in the latter it leads to a hyperdownbeat. The firstinterpretation is somewhat more viable since it places thephrase segments nearly in phase with the hypermeter, whereasin the second interpretation each phrase begins several beatsbefore the strongest hypermetric accent.20 Certainly, group-


Š Ý

šÝ

ŠÝ

²²²

²²²

²²²

Ł²

Ł

ŁŁ² Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł¦

Ł

ŁŁ¦ Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

²

Ł²

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł²

Ł

ŁŁ² Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł²

Ł

ŁŁ

¦

² Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

²

Ł¦

Ł

ŁŁ¦ Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł²

¼

ŁŁ² Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

¼

¼

¼

¼

Ł

ŁŁ ŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

²

² Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ¦

Ł

¼

¼

Ł² Ł

Ł

ŁŁ Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ\

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł²

Ł¼

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

¦

Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

¼

Ł

Ł

Ł¦

Ł

ŁŁ Ł

Ł¦

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

¼

Ł

Ł¦

Ł[

Ł

ŁŁ² Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ Ł²

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ²

Ł Ł

Ł

ŁŁ² Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł²

Ł

ŁŁ Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁ !

97

3

Urlinie:

3 4(hypermetric upbeat)

(5̂) 4̂

1Tonal return

3̂

2

(3̂)

3

2̂

4

1̂

espress. cresc.

espress.

example 11. Brahms, Cello Sonata op. 38, ii, 97–106: Urlinie descent within extended hypermetric upbeat.

20 Describing the relationship between grouping and metric structures as“in phase” and “out of phase” comes from Lerdahl and Jackendoff 1983,30. Their second metric preference rule weakly favors metric structures




ing and metric structures can be out of phase, but the norma-tive relationship in the minuet is alignment between thefour-measure phrases and the four-measure hypermeter. Inaddition to an out-of-phase relationship, placing strong met-ric accents at mm. 44, 46, 48, and 50 means that every arrivalon tonic harmony in the first reprise is hypermetricallystrong. Coordinating tonal and metric accents to this extentgives the music a certain heaviness and inelegance, especiallysince three of the four tonic arrivals emphasize 1̂ in themelody. When the strong metric accents fall on mm. 43, 45,

47, and 49, the hypermetric accents have more varied tonalcontent. Notwithstanding the ultimate attractiveness of thisinterpretation, the simplicity of the passage is such that ei-ther hypermeter could be inferred. Performance choices willshape listener response; a performance that makes a slightseparation between the quarter-note A and the following G♯and that marks the G♯ with a stress accent will cue the G♯ asa hyperdownbeat. Particularly significant, too, is the tempo-ral relationship between the minuet and trio. Since the min-uet ends with a four-measure hypermeasure, beginning thetrio without delay and/or tempo modification also reinforcesthe metric strength of the G♯.

A tiny, but exquisite, alteration at the start of the thematicreturn exploits the special ambiguity of the trio’s opening. At


Ł Ł Ł Ł

Ł

Ł Ł Ł Ł

Ł

Ł² Ł² Ł

Ł¦

Ł¦ Ł Ł Ł Ł

Ł

Ł Ł

Ł¦

Ł Ł

Ł

Ł

²

Ł

Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł²Ł¦

Ł

Ł

² Ł

Ł

¦ Ł

Ł

Ł²Ł

Ł

¦

¦

ŠÝ

²²²

²²²

ð

ð

Ł

Ł

Ł² Ł.

Ł

Ł Ł Ł

Ł² Ł ŁŁ²

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ² ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ¦ Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł¦ Ł. Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł¦ Ł Ł

ŠÝ

²²²

²²² ŁŁ ŁŁ

Ł

² ð

Ł ð

ð

ð Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

¦ ŁŁ ð

ŁŁŁ Ł Łð²

ð

ð

² ŁŁŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

Ł

!

!

( )

77

²65

6 5

82

6 6

86

47²

87 90

6¦5

93

624 6

97

8 7

100

5 6

101 (=105)

36 5

²

111104 (=108)

5

113

6

First reprise Second reprise

5̂

Measure:4-prg.

4̂ 3̂ 2̂ 1̂

(transition)

I V I III

V I V IV7/A

example 12. Voice-leading sketch of trio.

that place strong beats at or soon after beginnings of groups. This isimplicit in Rothstein 1989, and is explicitly stated as the “rule of con-gruence” in Rothstein 1995, 173.




the dominant arrival in m. 58, the melody does not stop toallow a fresh articulation of the quarter-note A that one ex-pects to launch the thematic return. This seamlessness in m. 58 is highlighted by the passage’s orchestration. A soloflute doubles the violins in a higher octave in the first reprise,and after being silent at the start of the second reprise, theflute returns at the downbeat of m. 58. It is as if the flutistre-enters two beats early, and the melodic arrival on thedownbeat of m. 58 must therefore be sustained into the ges-tural upbeat that launches the thematic return. This lack ofre-articulation could bear on the hypermetric interpretationof the thematic return. If one senses the entirety of m. 58 astruly belonging both to the previous phrase and to the the-matic return, it becomes possible to hear m. 58 as a fourthhyperbeat that is expanded, a reading shown at the bottomof Example 13. This possibility makes the two hypermetric

alternatives for the music of the first reprise more equally ac-cessible when that music returns at the end of the secondreprise.

The minuet from Haydn’s string quartet, op. 71, no. 3 hasa similar, but slightly more complex, handling of hypermetricambiguity. The annotations on Example 14 suggest the pos-sibility of hyperdownbeats either at mm. 1 and 5 or at mm. 2and 6. As in the symphonic movement, reading A brings hy-permeter and phrase structure in phase, and reading B coor-dinates hypermeter with more of the passage’s accents, suchas those of harmony, texture and duration. At m. 8 some-thing unsettling happens, and this has an impact on the met-ric strength of mm. 9 and 10—the measures that provide thenext hyperdownbeat in the two interpretations. The groupingand motivic repetition in mm. 5–12 suggest an eight-measuresentence. Yet Haydn avoids a sharp boundary between the


ŠÝ

²²²²

/0/0

Ł\¼

Ł²ÿ

Ł Ł Ł Ł¦ Ł ð¼ Ł

ŁŁ

Ł Łð

Ł Ł Ł ŁŁŁ Ł

ŁŁ Ł

¼Ł Ł

¼Ł Ł²

ÿŁ Ł Ł Ł¦ Ł ð

¼ ŁŁŁ

Ł Łð

Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ

Ł ŁŁ

¼

Ł

((

$

%

Š

Ý

²²

²²

(

(

¼[Ł Ł

¼Ł Ł²

ŁŁ

Ł Ł

ŁŁ

Ł Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

¼Ł¦ Ł

¼Ł¦ Ł

ŁŁ¦

Ł Ł

ŁŁ

Ł Ł

ŁŁ¦

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

¼

Ł ŁŁ

Ł

Ł Ł²

¼

Ł Ł

¼

Ł ŁŁ

Ł

Ł Ł

¼

Ł ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ð ýŁ ¼ ¼

(

(

$

%

42

50

Vln. I/Vln. IISolo flute (8va)

Va. (8va)Vc.

Cb. (8vb)

1ORupbeat

2

1

3

2

4

3

1

4

2

1

3

2

4

3

Flute tacet

1

4

2

1

3

2

4

3

1

4

2

1

3

2

Flute returns

4

3

4(=1

OR

mm. 59–66 =mm. 43–50

1

4

2)

2

1

1

3

2

2

4

3

3

1

4

4

2

1

1

3

2

2

4

3

3

example 13. Haydn, Symphony No. 53, iii, trio: a gestural upbeat with two possible hypermetric interpretations.





ŠŠ

šÝ

−−−−−−

−−−−−−

/0/0/0/0

Ł

¼

¼¼

Ł¦ Łÿ

ÿÿ

Ł Ł− Ł Ł Ł ŁlŁlŁlŁl

ŁlŁlŁlŁl

Ł

¼

¼¼

Ł Łl

ŁlŁlŁl

Łl

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł

Ł¦Łl

Łl

Ł¦

Ł

Łl

ŁlŁlŁl

Łl

ŁlŁlŁl

¼¼

Ł

¼Ł¦

¼¼

Łÿ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł− Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł Ł

Łl

Łl

Łl¼

Łl

Łl

Łl¼

¼¼

¼Ł Ł¦

¼¼

¼Ł Ł

Ł

ŁŁl

Ł Ł

Ł

ŁŁl

Ł Ł

Łl

Łl

ð ý¦[_

ð ý[_

Ł

ŁlŁ

¼

Ł Łl

Łl

ð ý[_

ð ý[_

Ł

ŁlŁ

¼

Ł Łl[_

ð ý−[_

ð[_

ð ý¦[_

Ł Ł

Ł

Ł¦ Ł

Ł¦Ł

ð

Ł

Ł

¼

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł¦

Ł

Ł¦

ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

¼¼

¼Ł

((

((

$

%

ŠŠšÝ

−−−−−−−−−

−−−

(((

(

Ł

Ł¼

¼

Ł¦

Ł

Ł

Łÿ

ÿ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Łl

ŁlŁlŁ Ł¦

Łl

ŁlŁlŁ Ł

Ł

ŁlŁl

¼

Ł Łl

ŁlŁl

Ł Ł¦

Łl

ŁlŁlŁ Ł

Ł

Ł− lŁl

¼

Ł¦ Łl

ŁlŁlŁ Ł¦

Łl

ŁlŁlŁ Ł

Ł ý

Ł−Ł

¼

ŁŁ

Ł ðŁŁ

ÿ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

Łl

ŁlŁl¼

Łl

ŁlŁl¼

Ł ý

Ł ýŁŁ−

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ð

ðŁ−Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ−

Łl

Łl

ŁlŁl

Łl

Łl

ŁlŁl

Ł

Ł¼

¼

Ł

Ł

Ł−

Łÿ

Ł¦ l

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Łl

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Łl

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł¼Ł− l

Ł

Ł

Ł

¼Ł

¼

Ł²

Ł

Ł

¼Ł

¼

Ł¦

Ł¦

Ł

ÿŁ

ÿ

Ł¦

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł¦

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

$

%

12

reading A:reading B: hypermetric upbeat

grouping structure in phase with reading A

1 21

32

43

(presentation)

14

21

32

reading Bboundary supportblurred groupingnew motive and

43

14

(continuation)

21

32

43

grouping structure in phase with reading A

14

21

32

43

and durational accents reinforce reading A

14?

21?

32?

43?

14?

21? 2?

example 14. Haydn, String Quartet op. 71, no. 3, iii, 1–47: a gestural upbeat with some hypermetric ambiguity.





ŠŠšÝ

−−−−−−−−−−−−

ð

ððð ý

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁ Ł

¼¼¼

Ł Ł

Ł

¼¼

Ł

Ł¦

Ł²

Ł

¼¼

ð ý

Ł Ł−

ŁŁŁ

Ł Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł Łl¼¼ð ý

ŁlŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł¦ Ł

¼¼

ð ý

Ł Ł−

ŁŁŁ

Ł Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł Łl¼¼ð ý

ŁlŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł¦ Ł

¼¼

ð ý

Ł Ł−

ŁŁŁ

Ł Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł Ł−

ð ýð ýð ý

Ł Ł− Ł Ł Ł Łð ýðð ý

Ł¦ Ł Ł Ł

Ł

Ł ð−

ððŁ Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł Ł

ŁŁŁ Ł

¼¼¼Ł Ł

¼Ł

¼Ł

Ł¦

Ł²

$

%

ŠŠšÝ

−−−−−−−−−−−−

¼Ł

¼ð ý

Ł¼Ł−Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁð ý

Ł Ł

¼Ł

Ł Ł

Ł¦Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

¼ð ý

Ł¼Ł−Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł¦

ŁŁð ý

Ł Ł

¼Ł

Ł Ł

Ł¦Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł−

Ł

¼ð ý

Ł¼Ł−Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

ð ý−[_ð ý[_ð ý[_

Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł[_ŁŁð ý

Ł¦

Ł¦

Ł

Ł¼

Ł

Ł¦

Ł

Ł¼

Ł

Ł

ð

ð¼ð ý

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł Ł

ŁŁŁ

¼¼¼¼

Ł\\

¼¼¼

Ł¦ Ł

¼¼

ÿ

Ł Ł−¼¼

Ł Ł

Ł−\Ł\

Ł ŁlŁŁð ý\

ŁlŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł Łl

ŁlŁlŁl

Łl

ŁlŁl¼

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł Łl

ŁŁ

Ł

¼¼¼¼

((((

$

%

24

35

3(readings converge)

4

(presentation)

1Reading A confirmed by upbeat gesture’s (tonic!) harmonization and incorporation into a sentence design

2 3 4

(continuation)

1

D−!

2 3 4

mm. 35–43 = mm. 26–34

1 2 3 4 1

counterstressaccent provideregistral peak and

2(1?

32?

43?

14?

21?

32?

43?)

example 14. [continued]




presentation (mm. 5–8) and continuation (mm. 9–12).21

Instead, the musical material in m. 8 is the same as that atthe start of the continuation. This makes m. 8 seem metri-cally stronger than it otherwise would be; the musical effectis that the last measure of the presentation becomes the firstmeasure of the continuation. Such an overlap of groupingfunction tends to suggest a shift from hypermetric weaknessto strength. Given the duple basis of the hypermeter, the unexpected reinforcement of m. 8 lends metric strength tom. 10, at the expense of m. 9. Thus, although the phrasestructure in mm. 1–4 reinforces mm. 1 and 5 as hyperdown-beats, the blurring of the internal divisions of the followingphrase promotes reading B. The competing understandingsof hypermeter in the first reprise of this minuet are morenearly balanced than in the symphonic movement.

The second reprise begins with the extended upbeat ges-ture, which allows the ambiguity to continue, but during thesecond reprise it becomes clear that the gestural upbeat isnot a hypermetric upbeat. This process begins in mm. 17–20as the upbeat gesture serves as counterpoint to a new melodyin the first violin that reinforces the metric strength of mm.17 and 19 through durational accents and sequence. The hypermetric identity of the upbeat gesture is solidified in the passage that begins at m. 26. At m. 26, the upbeat ges-ture forms the basis of repeated two-measure units, and thefigure is harmonized. The harmonization lends particularweight to the initial measure since Haydn accompanies thatmeasure with a first-inversion tonic harmony whereas thefollowing measure has a third-inversion dominant seventhharmony. The harmonization of the upbeat gesture is espe-cially effective because the implied harmony at the openingwas dominant harmony, as it was earlier in the second reprise(see, for example, mm. 13 and 17).

Although the hypermetric orientation of the upbeat ges-ture is clear at m. 26, there is a vestige of ambiguity at the end

of the reprise when a modified repeat of mm. 1–4 occurs. Thephrase that begins at m. 26 is a nine-measure sentence;the continuation is expanded by one measure. In the presen-tation, the bass line moves once per measure, but at the startof the continuation the bass line remains on G for an extrameasure. The tonic harmony is transformed into a dominantof IV, and that transformation takes an extra measure. Theexpansion serves the development of the opening motive.The implication of the upbeat motive is a stepwise continua-tion; although F could serve as a logical alternative to D for a goal pitch of the upbeat gesture, D ♭ is a more colorfulchoice. The D ♭ requires resolution to C, and only an awk-ward acceleration in harmonic rhythm could place that Csooner than the following downbeat. Thus, the continuationspans five measures, but hypermetrically the first two measurescount as a single measure. In m. 35, the phrase from mm. 26–34 repeats. Taking the phrase expansion into account, the ca-dence completes a hypermeasure. This places the return of theopening music at a hyperdownbeat. But mm. 35–43 are not anexact repeat of mm. 26–34. Haydn marks m. 41 more stronglythan the corresponding measure in the previous phrase. Thefirst violin soars to its highest pitch in the movement, andthe C6 also receives a dynamic accent. In the underlying hy-permeter, m. 41 is the second hyperbeat in a four-measurehypermeasure, but it receives an undue amount of phenome-nal emphasis. This counterstress subtly questions the metricaccent of m. 42. Due to the duple basis of the minuet’s hy-permeter, the emphasis at m. 41 resonates with the downbeatof m. 43. This subtle reinforcement of m. 41 and thus m. 43slightly undercuts the hyperdownbeat at m. 44, the locationwhere the material from the minuet’s opening returns. Thisinterplay of main and shadow hypermeters at the end of thesecond reprise is not unlike what happened five bars beforethe end of the first reprise. In both cases an unexpected eventtemporarily supports the hypermeter that makes the gesturalupbeat into a hypermetric upbeat.

In both the trio from Symphony 53 and the minuet fromop. 71, no. 3, the hypermetric placement of the upbeat gesture


21 The terms presentation and continuation for the two halves of a sen-tence come from Caplin 1998, 35–48.




is open to two interpretations, but there is little sense of con-flict. In some minuets, irregular group lengths challenge theestablishment of hypermeter and require frequent metricreinterpretations; two examples are the minuets from Haydn’sstring quartets op. 76, no. 3 and op. 71, no. 2. In op. 76, no. 3the hypermetric conflict eventually finds some resolution,whereas in op. 71, no. 2 it does not.

As seen at the outset of this essay, the minuet from op. 76,no. 3 begins with a gestural upbeat that is also a hypermetricupbeat. Example 15 provides the score to the first reprise inits entirety. The root-position tonic harmony, the half-notein the melody, and the integrity of mm. 2–5 as a unit solidifythe hypermetric primacy of m. 2. The upbeat gesture returnsto start the second phrase, and one would expect the upbeatwould stand apart from the main hypermeter of the minuet,as was the case in Mozart’s K. 575. In the present minuet,this is not a viable possibility as the following measure is notmarked as a beginning. The upbeat gesture in m. 6 must beheard as hypermetrically strong, at least in relation to m. 7.Thus, the upbeat gestures in mm. 1 and 6 have different hypermetric identities.

By the end of the first reprise, the music settles into four-measure groups that are also hypermeasures (mm. 13–16 and17–20). The crucial phrase in this progression from hyper-metric conflict to resolution is the one between mm. 6 and12. This is a seven-measure phrase, and this hypermetricallyirregular length may be understood in two different, but notdissimilar, ways. Since mm. 6–12 follow a four-measure an-tecedent phrase (mm. 2–5), one prototype is a four-measure(modulating) consequent phrase like the recomposition inExample 16(a). The recomposition implies that the secondtonicization of A minor and the lofty ascent of the first vio-lin are elements of the expansion; this corresponds to hyper-metric reading A in Example 15. Yet, the seven-measurephrase may also be understood as a condensation of twofour-measure hypermeasures, as in the recomposition of Example 16(b). Pivotal in this interpretation is m. 9. Mea-sure 9 is expected to complete a hypermeasure, but this mea-

sure instead initiates a cohesive four-measure unit; thisgrouping elision causes the hypermetric reinterpretation atm. 9 shown in reading B in Example 15. Both readings com-plete a hypermeasure at m. 12, which prepares the hypermet-ric consonance of mm. 13–20. Reading B, though, perhapsmore vividly embodies the expressive effect of these mea-sures. The melodic content of the first violin in m. 9 is basedon a transposition of the upbeat gesture to the key of thedominant. The upbeat motive is thereby integrated into thecrucial hypermetric reinterpretation that sets up the periodiccompletion of the first reprise. Coordinating the return ofthe upbeat motive in m. 9 with a hypermetric reinterpreta-tion is congruent with the passage’s rhetorical effect: themusic finds its way after losing direction in the repetitions ofmm. 7 and 8.

The hypermetric discussion in the previous paragraphdoes not mention a maximally periodic hearing of the firstreprise. The first reprise consists of twenty measures, and ifone were to consider m. 1 as a hyperdownbeat, there wouldbe no need for a hypermetric reinterpretation at m. 9, butsuch a reading would still give the upbeat gestures in mm. 1and 6 different hypermetric identities. Most importantly, amaximally periodic interpretation of the first reprise ignoresthe multiple phenomenal accents that cue m. 2 as a hyper-downbeat as well as the special quality of coalescence at m. 9.It would artificially mask, rather than reveal, the implicationsof this minuet ’s unusually long upbeat and the interplay between the hypermetric identity of that upbeat gesture,phenomenal accents, and phrase lengths. In addition, a max-imally periodic interpretation of the hypermeter would op-pose the expressive content of the music. The progressionfrom hypermetric dissonance to consonance in my readingcorrelates with the change from a cantilena style in mm. 1–12to a “lower” style in the final eight measures of the reprise.

The thematic return in the second reprise largely followsthe course of the first reprise, except for the phrase corre-sponding to mm. 6–12. The seven-measure phrase becomesan eleven-measure phrase (mm. 38–48; see Example 17).





The new material comes at the start of the phrase and con-sists of a four-measure unit that subdivides into two-measureunits. Thus, this sharply defined four-measure group followsthe return of the music from mm. 2–5. As a result, the newmaterial supports hearing m. 2 (and the corresponding m. 34)as a hyperdownbeat. Yet, the new material in mm. 38–41 be-gins with the upbeat gesture from m. 1; thus, mm. 38 and 40present the upbeat motive as hypermetrically accented, re-quiring that this gesture have a different hypermetric func-

tion than it did at the start of the thematic return (and at thestart of the minuet). After m. 41, the thematic return followsthe path of the first reprise with the material transposed intoC major, ending the minuet with hypermetric consonance.

In the minuet of op. 76, no. 3, the upbeat gesture haschanging hypermetric identities, and this problem emergeswithin the movement’s first two phrases. This hypermetricdissonance is convincingly resolved at the end of each reprisethrough symmetrical phrase divisions. In the minuet from


Ł.

ŠŠšÝ

/0/0/0/0

Ł[¼

¼¼

Łÿ

ÿÿ

Ł Ł ð

Łl[Łl

[Łl[

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł

¼

¼¼

ð

ŁlŁlŁl

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł¼

¼¼

Ł ýð ýðŁ Ł

Ł Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł Ł

ŁŁ

ð

Ł¼Ł

Ł

¼

¼¼

Łÿ

¼¼

Ł

¼¼

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł¼ŁŁ²

Ł¼ŁŁ

ŁŁlŁlŁl

Ł Ł

Ł

ŁŁ²

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Łl

Łl

Łl

Łl

Ł²

ðŁŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Łl

ŁŁ

Ł²

ðŁŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

$

%

ŠŠšÝ

ð

ððð

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł²

Ł

Ł

ŁlŁl

Łl

¼

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł²

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł ý Ł²

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł ý Ł²

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł ý Ł²ŁlŁlŁl

Ł ý ðŁlŁlŁl

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł

ŁlŁlŁl

ŁŁ² lŁlŁl

ŁŁlŁlŁl

Ł Ł

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł Ł

ððð

Ł Łl

Łl

¼

Ł² Ł ý

Łl

Łl

ÿ

Ł² Ł ý

Łl

Łl

Ł² Ł ý

Łl

Łl

Ł² Ł ý

ð

ðÿ

ð

Ł

¼

¼

Ł Łð ý²ð ýð ý

Ł Ł Ł Ł ŁŁŁŁ

¼¼¼¼

((((

$

%

11

upbeat gestures in m. 1 and m. 6 have different hypermetric status

1hypermetric upbeat 2 3 4 11

reading A:reading B:

22

33

cf. m. 1 (and m. 6)

4=1 2

344

hypermetric resolution

1(readings converge)

2 3 4 1 2 3 4

example 15. Haydn, String Quartet op. 76, no. 3, iii, 1–20: a gestural upbeat with changing hypermetric identity.




Haydn’s string quartet op. 71, no. 2 there is no clarificationof the hypermeter or the upbeat ’s hypermetric role. Theminuet’s first reprise consists of two five-measure phrases,each of which begins with an upbeat gesture. Example 18shows two hypermetric readings. One interpretation placeshyperdownbeats at mm. 3 and 7. The phenomenal accents atm. 3 combined with the motivic repetition within mm. 1–2and 3–4 support this reading. The end of the first phrasechallenges this interpretation. The half cadence that ends thefirst phrase does not end the hypermeasure. Instead, the hy-permeasure concludes with the upbeat to the second phrase.It is very difficult to hear the tonal interruption at the halfcadence and a continuation of the hypermeasure into thestart of the following phrase. Reading B situates hyperdown-beats at mm. 2 and 7. In this reading the half cadence doescoincide with the end of a hypermeasure, but m. 2 initiallypresents as an unlikely point for the minuet’s first hyper-downbeat. Although short and tonally simple, the firstreprise of this minuet presents a pair of phrases with in-tractable irregularities. Due to the expectation of duple hy-permetric structure in the minuet, though, it would be less

valuable to observe five-measure phrases, declare the minuet“irregular,” and not probe the elements that promote or denyduple hypermeters, however vestigial they may be.

The thematic return does little to normalize the hyper-metric structure. Since the first reprise did not modulate tothe dominant, the thematic return invites minimal revision.Haydn repeats mm. 2–10 with few changes, though like thetrio from Symphony 53 there is a tiny but important alter-ation right at the start of the thematic return. The music corresponding to m. 1 does not recur. Hearing the return—which corresponds to m. 2—as a hyperdownbeat is promotednot only by the structural accent of thematic return but alsoby a variation in the recapitulated music. Instead of only asingle note in the cello, the thematic return accompanies thefirst violin’s melody with a chord in the other three instru-ments. Thus, whereas m. 2 was not marked as a hyperdown-beat, there are factors reinforcing the corresponding m. 20.Reading B is considerably more accessible for the first phraseof the thematic return than it was at the start of the minuet.Although this hearing places the half cadence at the end of ahypermeasure, it still, of course, requires hearing the gestural


ŠŠšÝ

Ł

¼¼¼

Łÿ

¼¼

Ł

¼¼

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł¼ŁŁ²

Ł¼ŁŁ

ŁŁŁlŁl

Ł Ł

Ł

ŁŁ²

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł²

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł

ŁlŁlŁl

¼

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł²

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł ý$

%

ŠŠšÝ

Ł

¼¼¼

Łÿ

¼¼

Ł

¼¼

Ł

ŁlŁl

Łÿ

ŁŁ²

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

¼¼

Łÿ

¼¼

Ł

¼¼

Ł

ŁlŁl

Ł²¼ŁŁ

Ł¼ŁŁ

Łl

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł²

ðŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

ŁlŁŁ

Ł²

ðŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ð

ððð

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł²

Ł

Ł

ŁlŁl

Łl

¼

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł²

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł ý$

%(a) (b)

example 16. Recomposition of mm. 6–12 as a four-measure phrase and an eight-measure phrase.




upbeat to the consequent phrase as lying outside of the mainhypermeter; in other words, the motivically similar mm. 20and 24 have different hypermetric identities. Notably, Haydnfollows this hypermetrically complex minuet with a trio thathas unusually clear four-measure groups throughout.

The three categories considered thus far encapsulate mostminuets that begin with extended gestural upbeats. I willnow turn to two relatively rare configurations that involveradical reinterpretation of opening material.

gestural extended upbeats become hypermetric upbeats

The minuet from Haydn’s string quartet op. 50, no. 5 be-gins with an upbeat gesture that is hypermetrically strong,but later turns into a hypermetric upbeat. In this rather ex-ceptional movement, both the minuet and trio employ thesame upbeat gesture; since the trio is in the parallel minor,the thematic relationship is unusually explicit.


ŠŠšÝ

Ł[¼¼¼

Łÿÿÿ

Ł Ł ð

Łl[Łl

[Łl[

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł

¼¼¼

ð

ŁlŁlŁl

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł¼¼¼

Ł ýð ýðŁl Łl

Ł Ł

Ł

Łl

Ł Ł

ŁŁ

ð

Ł¼Ł

¼

Ł¼Ł

¼

Ł²¼Ł

¼

Ł¼Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ððð

Ł ¼Ł¼Ł

¼

Ł¼Ł²

¼Ł¼Ł

Ł

ŁŁŁ

$

%

ŠŠšÝ

Ł

ððð

Ł² Ł

Ł

¼¼

Ł

Ł²

¼¼

Ł

Ł

¼¼

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł−

Ł

ŁŁ²

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

ðŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł²

Ł

ðŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

ð

ð

ð ýð ý

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Łl

ŁlŁl

¼

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł ý$

%

32

41

1hypermetric upbeat 2 3 4

from upbeat in m. 33 (and m. 1), but upbeat gestural quality reducednew 4-measure group in phase with hypermeter; based on pitches

1 2 3

4 1 2 3 4=1 2 3 4

mm. 49–56 =

mm. 13–20 in

C major

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

example 17. Haydn, String Quartet op. 76, no. 3, iii, thematic return.





ŠŠšÝ

²²²²²²²²

/0/0/0/0

ÿÿÿ

Łl[ Łl Łl

Łl[ ÿÿ

Łl

Łl

¼

Łl

¼

Ł ý

Łl[Łl[Łl

[

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł Ł Ł.

ŁlŁl

Łl

¹ Ł ý

ŁlŁlŁl

ŁlŁlŁl

Ł Ł Ł.

ŁlŁl

Łl

¹ Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Łlÿÿ

ÿ

Łl Łl Ł ý

ð ýŁ¦ l

ŁlŁl

Łl

Ł Ł Ł-l

Łl

Łl

¹ Ł ý

ð ýŁlŁl

ŁlŁl

Ł Ł Ł-l

ŁlŁl

¹ ŁŁð ýð ý

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł ýŁ ýŁ ýŁ ý

ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

Ł.lŁ.lŁ.lŁ-l

¹¹¹

¹

(((

(

$

%

ŠŠšÝ

²²²²²²²²

((((

Ł\¼¼

ÿ

Ł¼¼

Ł² lŁ¦\Ł

\

Ł ýŁŁ

ÿ

ŁŁ

Ł Ł Ł-l

¼¼

¹ ¼¼

ÿŁ

\

¼¼

Ł

Ł¦Ł

Ł² l

ŁŁ

ÿŁ ý

Ł

Ł

Ł Ł

Ł²Ł¦

Ł.l ¹

ŁŁ¼Ł ý

Ł

ð¼

Ł Ł

Ł

ŁŁ.l ¹

ŁðŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁl

ŁŁðŁ ý

ŁŁ

Ł Ł

ŁŁŁŁ. ¹

ŁŁŁŁ Ł Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁ²Ł²

ŁŁðð

ŁŁ

ŁŁŁ¦¼

$

%

ŠŠšÝ

²²²²²²²²

Łl[ŁlŁlŁl

Łl

¼¼¼

Łl

¼¼¼

Ł ý

Łl[Łl[Łl

[

ŁlŁl¼

Ł Ł Ł.lŁlŁl

¼

¹ Ł ý

ŁlŁlŁl

ŁlŁl

¼

Ł Ł Ł.lŁlŁl

¼

¹ Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁŁ

Łlÿÿÿ

Łl Łl Ł ý

Ł¦ lŁlŁl

ŁlŁl

¼

Ł Ł Ł-l

Ł¦ lŁl

¼

¹ Ł ý

ŁlŁlŁl

ŁlŁl¼

Ł Ł Ł-l

ŁlŁl

¼

¹ ŁŁ

Łð ý

ŁŁ

¼

ŁŁ²

¼

Ł ýŁ ý

Ł ýŁ ý

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

Ł.lŁ.lŁ.lŁ.l

¹¹¹¹

((((

$

%

11

20

motivic repetition supports reading A

upbeatupbeat

reading A:reading B: 1

12

phrase boundary supports reading B

23

34

HC4upbeat

11

22

33

PAC44

11

22

33

4=14=1

22

33

44

55

HC66

addedchord

upbeat1

12

23

34

HC4upbeat

11

22

33

PAC44

example 18. Haydn, String Quartet op. 71, no. 2, iii, 1–28: a gestural upbeat that leads to competing hypermetric interpretations.




The minuet’s first reprise consists of eight measures thatdivide into two hypermeasures (see Example 19). Althoughdurational and dynamic accents mark m. 3, the expandedD–C motion of mm. 3–4 is an echo of the essential pitch mo-tion of m. 1, clarifying the hypermetric priority of m. 1 overm. 3. The harmonic content of the first four measures is atyp-ical; not only do these measures suggest a single harmony, butthat harmony is a dominant-seventh chord. The fourth mea-sure is not a half cadence in the home key—as one oftenfinds in the fourth measure of a moderately paced minuet—but a tonal preparation for the initiating tonic harmony ofm. 5. The surface hypermeter is unambiguous in mm. 1–8:there are two four-measure hypermeasures, even if m. 5 is abit more convincing as a hyperdownbeat than is m. 1.

Haydn seizes on the unusual harmonic content of mm.1–4 at the thematic return. The second reprise begins withtwo four-measure hypermeasures, the latter one concludingwith the dominant arrival at m. 16. The first violin moves upto C, as if to return to the opening but in a higher register.Instead, there follows a lengthy extension of dominant har-mony; this extension ends in mm. 24–27 with a return of themelody from mm. 1–4. Measure 28, which corresponds tom. 5, brings a return of tonic harmony and a hyperdownbeat.In the surface hypermeter, the return of the opening fourmeasures is aligned with the hypermeter, although a hyper-metric reinterpretation is involved. This surface hypermeter,however, is entirely different in quality from the hypermeterof mm. 1–4. The downbeat of m. 1 had similar metricstrength to the downbeat of m. 5, but this is not the case withthe downbeats of mm. 24 and 28. Measure 24 has a fractionof the metric strength of m. 28. Measure 24 is undercut notonly by its position at the end of a long tonal extension butalso by the new accompanying lines in the second violin andviola. In m. 24 these accompanying lines imply a 64 chord (theactual sonority on the last beat is 86). There have already beenseveral 6

4 chords in the dominant extension of the previousmeasures, and the 6

4 of m. 24 comes across as but anotherneighbor motion in the upper voices.

After the minuet’s structural close in F major, the upbeatfigure makes one last appearance. At m. 34, the first violin’srepetition of the opening motive falls on a hyperdownbeat,but it has a different rhetorical effect than m. 1. The upbeatgesture in m. 34 initiates a codetta that comes after a conclu-sive cadence, one that was rhetorically strengthened by thefirst violin’s ascent in mm. 30–31 and the slowing of the harmonic progression in mm. 28–31. As the recompositionin Example 20 suggests, mm. 28–33 expand a four-measurephrase. The temporal expansion and the soaring ascent donot reduce the metric strength of the hyperdownbeat at thestart of the next phrase, but they do sharpen the redefinitionof formal function between m. 34 and m. 1. The upbeat ges-ture, while regaining its original hypermetric identity, is not entirely restored to its initial stature. Despite its post-cadential function, the minuet’s last statement of the upbeatgesture undergoes a significant and unexpected develop-ment. Instead of projecting a single harmony, the gesture isaltered to traverse the circle of fifths. As is typical for the descending-fifths sequence, there is a melodic sequence bydescending step; the model spans two beats. Within mm.34–37, the two-beat length of the sequential unit does notchallenge the 3

4 meter, but the situation changes in the min-uet’s last four measures: the chords in mm. 38–40 imply ashift into 24 meter. The end of the minuet is heard either as aseries of violent syncopations against 3

4 meter or as a shiftinto a metrically dissonant 2

4. Although this metric disso-nance evolves directly through motivic development of theupbeat motive, it comes off as a witticism not particularly ex-pected in a moderately paced minuet.

The trio returns to the original version of the upbeat, butshifted into the parallel minor (see Example 21). The trioseems to revert to the hypermetric structure of the minuet’sopening. The third measure bears a durational and dynamicstress, the third and fourth measures repeat the D ♭–C mo-tion of the trio’s first measure, and there is a significant tonalarrival in the fifth measure. The trio, though, has significantdifferences. During its initial four measures, the trio moves






Ł Ł Ł¦ Ł Ł Ł¦ Ł Ł Ł¦ Ł Ł Ł¦Ł Ł Ł¦

Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł² Ł Ł ŁŁ− Ł Ł¦ Ł Ł Ł Ł− Ł Ł

Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł¦ Ł Ł Ł¦ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł ŁŁ Ł Ł²

Ł Ł Ł¦ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł¦ Ł²

Š

Ý

−

−

/0

/0 ¾

Ł00l\

¼

Ł

ÿ

Ł Ł¦ Łl

ÿ

Ł− Ł Ł

¼

ð¼ ý[ ŁŁ

Ł

lll

ŁŁŁ

lll

ŁŁŁŁ

lll

¼

¹ ý Ł00l][

¼

Ł

¼

Ł¼

ŁŁŁ¹ ý

lll Ł00l

ŁŁŁŁlll

¼

Ł¼ŁŁŁ¹ ý

lll

Ł00l

ŁŁŁŁlll

ŁŁŁ¼

ll

ŁŁŁŁ

l

llŁŁŁŁ¦

llll

ŁŁŁŁ

l

lll

¹Ł

¹

ý-

ý

l ¾

(

(

(

( ¾

Ł00l\

¼

ŁŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁ−

ŁŁŁ

Š

Ý

−

−ððŁ ý² Ł

Ł

Ł

ððð

ýýý

ð

Łð

¹ ý Ł00l

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁŁl

ŁŁ¹ ý

llŁ00l

ŁŁŁ

ll

¼

Ł¼

ŁŁ¹ ý

llŁ00l

ŁŁŁ

llŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

ðŁŁŁ

ý ŁŁ¹ ý Ł00l

ŁŁŁ

ðŁŁŁ

ý

−−

ŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

ðŁŁŁ

ýŁŁ¹ ý Ł00l

ŁŁŁ

ððŁŁ

ý

− ŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

¦

−

ðŁŁŁ

ýl

¼Ł¹ ýl

Ł00l

¼

ŁŁ

Š

Ý

−

− ð

ŁŁ

ý

−Ł¹ ýl

Ł00¦ lŁŁ

²

ð

ŁŁ

ý

Ł¹ ýl

Ł00¦ lŁŁ

²

ð¼

ŁŁ

ý

¦

¼Ł¹ ýl

Ł00² l

Ł

ŁŁ

² ðŁ

ŁŁ

ý Ł

ŁŁ

¦

¦²

Ł

ŁŁ

¦

¦

l

l

ðð

ðŁ

ý

ý− Ł

Ł

Łl

ðð

ðð

ý

ý

−[ Ł

Ł¦

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¼

¼¹ýýŁ00][

¼

Ł¼

¼

¼Ł

ŁŁ

Ł¹ ý

ll

lŁ00

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

l

¼

¼Ł

ŁŁŁ¹ ý

−l

llŁ00

ŁŁ

ŁŁl

l

l

¼

¼Ł

ŁŁŁ¹ ý

l

llŁ00

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

l

l

Š

Ý

−

− ¼

¼Ł ý

ŁŁŁ

l

lŁ.

ŁŁŁŁ

l

lŁ

ðððð

ýŁŁŁ ŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

l Ł¼¼¹ ý

l

Ł00\

¼

Ł¹ ý Ł11ÿ

ŁŁ ŁŁ¦l ŁŁl

l

ÿ

ŁŁl ŁŁ ý−l

Ł² ŁŁll

ÿŁŁ² l ŁŁ²

l ŁŁ¦l

l

¼

ŁŁ¦ l¼ŁŁ¦l

ŁŁŁŁ

l

l

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

l

¼

¼

ŁŁŁŁ

l

l

¼

¼

ŁŁŁŁ

l

l

¼

¼

ŁŁŁŁŁ

l

l[

¼

¼

ŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

l

l

¼

¼

¹

¹

ý

ý (

(

2 !

!

!

!

10

21

31

-

1

D C

2 3

D -

4

C

1

accentTonal

2 3 4 1

2 3 4 1 2 3 41(surface: 2 3 4

1 2 3 4=1

=mm. 1–4

2 3 4)1Tonal return

2

3 4 1 2

Duple grouping dissonance becomes progessively stronger

3 4 1 2? 3?? 4???

cresc.

cresc.

Allegretto

example 19. Haydn, String Quartet op. 50, no. 5, iii, 1–41: a gestural upbeat that becomes a hypermetric upbeat.




from the dominant of F minor to that of A ♭ major, whichgives the third and fourth measures a more active qualitythan the corresponding measures in the minuet. The empha-sized fifth measure plays a different role in the phrase struc-ture. In the minuet, the fifth measure initiates a four-measurephrase that leads to a cadence. In the trio, the fifth measurebecomes a preparation for the phrase that gets underway inthe trio’s seventh measure. At m. 48, the upbeat motive be-gins on 6̂ in A ♭ major and initiates an eight-measure phrase.Thus, m. 48 has hypermetric priority over m. 46; m. 46 isinitially a hyperdownbeat at the four-measure level, but m.48 acquires that status. The first reprise of the trio strainsagainst periodic four-measure hypermeter; in addition to this

reinterpretation of m. 46, the eight-measure phrase in mm.48–55 is not subdivided into two four-measure units. In-stead, the motivic repetition between mm. 51 and 52 subtlychallenges the hyperdownbeat of m. 52.

The trio’s second reprise initially avoids hypermetric con-flicts, beginning with three four-measure hypermeasures. Infact, the second hypermeasure (mm. 60–63) consists of a development of the upbeat gesture that leads to a conclusivecadence in the subdominant on the fourth hyperbeat. Thetwelfth measure of the second reprise (m. 67) contains thearrival of the home dominant, which is shown at the start ofExample 22. Unlike the minuet, this dominant is not ex-tended. The tonal return occurs in m. 68, and thus the music


Ł Ł Ł¦ Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł Ł¦ŠÝ

−

−

/0/0 ¾

Ł00

¼

Ł

¼

¼Ł

ŁŁŁ¹ ý

lll

Ł00

ŁŁŁŁ

lll

¼

¼Ł

ŁŁŁ¼

lll

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

lŁ

ðððð

ýŁŁŁ ŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

l Ł¼¼¹ ý

l

Ł00

¼

Ł¹ ý Ł11 !1 2 3 4

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

¦

¦ Ł Ł Ł¦Š

Ý

−−−−

−−−−

/0

/0Ł

Ł

1111l

l

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

Ł

Ł

¦

¦Ł

Łl

l

Ł

Ł

−

−

Ł

Ł

Ł

Ł

¦

¦

ðð

ððý

ŁŁŁ

ðððð

ý ŁŁŁ

ðŁŁŁ

¼Ł

¼

Ł−

ÿ

Ł Ł ¾ Ł Ł

¼

¼ŁŁŁŁ¦l

ŁŁŁl

l

¼

Ł¼−ŁŁŁ¦

ŁŁŁ

l

¼¼Ł−

Ł ŁŁŁl

ŁŁŁŁl

l

ðððð

ýýý Ł¦

ðŁ

ððý

−

Ł Ł

ŁŁ

ðŁðŁ

ý Ł

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

ðððð

ý ŁŁŁ Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

¹

¹

ý

ý (

( !

41= F minor version of minuet opening

1 2 3 4 1

accenttonal

2

= A− major version begins

3?1 2

asymmetrical division of 8-measure phrase

3 4 1 2 3 4

example 20. Recomposition of mm. 28–33 as a four-measure phrase.

example 21. Haydn, String Quartet op. 50, no. 5, iii, 41–55.




cannot incorporate the dominant-prolonging upbeat gestureat this juncture. No musical material closely connected to the trio’s first reprise sounds; the tonal return is accompaniedby material from the start of the minuet’s second reprise! The upbeat gesture comes back only at m. 76, after the trio’sstructural close. Unlike the return in the minuet’s codetta,the return in the trio’s codetta continues the movement’s hypermetric conflicts.

Understanding the hypermetric context of the upbeat’sreturn requires a closer look at mm. 68–75. Measures 68–75are based on mm. 9–16 of the minuet (Examples 22 and 19).Measures 68–75 have a length of eight measures, but they donot have the effect of two four-measure hypermeasures. Asthe model of mm. 9–12 makes clear, it takes the phrase that

begins in m. 68 an extra measure to reach the arrival on thesubdominant. Throughout the movement, arrivals on longmelodic pitches have occurred on third hyperbeats, but theviolin only gets to E ♭ at m. 71, the fourth measure of thephrase. Even without the intraopus evidence of a one-measure phrase expansion, it would be difficult to assert ahyperdownbeat at the fifth measure of this phrase since thereis no change of harmony.22 To what measure is the hyper-


22 The presence of a prototype earlier in the piece affects the location ofthe expansion within the five-bar phrase. Compared to the prototype ofmm. 9–12, mm. 68–72 have an expanded second hyperbeat. Withoutthis context, the fourth hyperbeat would be considered as the expandedhyperbeat.

Ł Ł Ł¦Ł Ł Ł¦

Ł Ł Ł¦

Ł Ł

Š

Ý

−−−−

−−−− ŁŁŁŁ

¦

l

l

Ł¼¼¹ ý

l

Ł00\

¼

Ł¼ŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁ¦

ŁŁŁ

ððŁ

¦

Ł

ŁŁŁ

−

¦ l

¼ððŁ

¼

Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

¦ ðððð

ýýýý

[_ ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¼

¼¹ ý Ł00l

\¼

Ł¼

¼

¼Ł

¼

¼Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

ðððð

ýŁŁ ŁŁ¦

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

¹

¼

ý Ł11l Ł

¼Ł¼

ŁŁŁ

¦ ŁŁŁ¦

l

Š

Ý

−−−−

−−−− Ł

¼

− Ł

ŁŁl

lŁ

ŁŁ

¦

ll

ð¼¼

ýŁŁŁl

l

ŁŁŁl

l

ðŁ

Łð

ýý

ýý¦Ł

Ł

.

.

Ł

Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁ¦

ll

ll

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

ll

l

¹

¹

ý

ý

!

!

67

77

4 11[OR

expanded version of mm. 9–12

22 3 4

3 4]

1

2OR

4OR

2

3

1

3???

4

2

4???

1

3

2

4

3

1

4

2

5

3

6

4

example 22. Haydn, String Quartet op. 50, no. 5, iii, 67–81.




downbeat deferred? Initially, m. 73 presents as a hyperdown-beat; it is the next available downbeat, and it is prepared bythe turn figure that precedes most of the movement’s hyper-downbeats. This interpretation, however, places the cadentialarrival at m. 75 on a third hyperbeat; cadential arrivalsthroughout the movement consistently fall on fourth hyper-beats. The motivic similarity of the cadential approach to earlier ones—especially those in mm. 32 and 54—do notsuggest a change in the hypermetric placement of the cadence in mm. 74–75. This means that the first violin’smelody in m. 73 leads to a stronger metric accent in m. 74;the two possibilities are shown on Example 22.

The reading at the bottom of Example 22 takes m. 74 as ahyperdownbeat, but m. 74 presents the dominant harmonyof an authentic cadence, a function associated in this move-ment (and in general) with third hyperbeats rather than hyperdownbeats. In a view of hypermeter that rests more on equivalence classes rather than periodicity, the expectedhyperdownbeat is suppressed rather than deferred; m. 74 is a third hyperbeat.23 In an experience of hypermeter thatcomes mainly from periodicity, m. 74 is stronger than a thirdhyperbeat since a hyperdownbeat is overdue (the last one wasm. 68). In short, there is a hypermetric ambiguity at m. 74that was not present earlier in the movement. Since anotherrestatement of the upbeat gesture starts the trio’s next—andfinal—phrase, this hypermetric ambiguity carries over intothe upbeat gesture. Thus, it raises the possibility of hearingthe upbeat gesture in mm. 76–77 as leading towards a finalfour-measure hypermeasure, a structure that had not arisenpreviously (except perhaps in a highly retrospective hearingof the first six measures of the trio).

Unlike the minuets in the third category, the minuet fromop. 50, no. 5 begins without the suggestion of multiple hy-permetric interpretations. The upbeat is initially a gesturalupbeat but not a hypermetric one. At three points in themovement—the thematic return in the minuet, the start of

the trio, and the codetta in the trio—the upbeat’s hypermet-ric meaning changes, or at least becomes open to an alternateinterpretation. The last category of minuet I will consideralso involves reinterpretation, but a reinterpretation that isboth hypermetric and gestural.

non-upbeat gestures become hypermetric extended upbeats

The minuet from Haydn’s string quartet op. 64, no. 2opens with a quarter-note upbeat in its most typical pitchconfiguration: a motion from 5̂ to 1̂ (see Example 23). This 1̂is supported by tonic harmony, originally in first inversionbut in root position by the end of the measure. Althoughminuets that open with tonic harmony generally begin witha root-position sonority, the presence of a first-inversionsonority on the downbeat is not particularly unusual. WithinHaydn’s string quartets, the minuets of op. 42 and op. 33,no. 3 also begin with first-inversion tonic sonorities, and inboth cases the first measure is a hyperdownbeat. This ini-tially seems to be the case in op. 64, no. 2 as well since thesecond measure moves to supertonic harmony, an unstablediminished triad. Subsequent events precipitate a reversal ofthe hypermetric strengths of the opening two measures. Themotivic material of m. 2 repeats in m. 3, providing the firstindication that m. 2 may be hypermetrically stronger than m. 3. Then, the phrase’s cadence arrives in the fifth measure.At this point, reinterpreting the hypermetric identity of m. 1is not likely; the five-measure phrase is better understood asan expanded four-measure phrase with the expansion result-ing from the literal repetition in m. 3. This interpretation isnot, however, consistent with events in the second phrase.The second phrase begins directly with the musical contentof mm. 2 and 3, with the cello adding an A beneath theother parts to turn the diminished triad into the dominantseventh chord of the relative major. The return of mm. 2 and3 at the start of the second phrase suggests that the minuet’sfirst measure was an extended upbeat.


23 This usage of equivalence class comes from Benjamin 1984, 375.




The thematic return in the second reprise reenacts thesame hypermetric reinterpretation as the minuet’s first phrase.The start of the second reprise strongly projects two-measurehypermeter, and in this context the return of the minuet’sopening measure at m. 27 is hypermetrically strong, asshown in reading A in Example 24. Yet, the thematic repeti-tion in the phrase’s second and third measures promotes a retrospective reinterpretation of the hypermetric status ofm. 27, as contained in readings B and C. The thematic re-turn, however, does not reach a cadence in the fifth measure;instead a cadence only arrives after sixteen measures. Thisexpanded phrase is marked by an abrupt suspension of tonalmotion at the diminished seventh chord of m. 33. After thehiatus, the phrase resumes with eight measures of music thatproject two- and four-measure hypermeter, but the hyper-meter before the hiatus is open to multiple interpretations.

Reading A is unlikely; it maintains periodic hypermeter despite the opposing forces in mm. 27–34. Readings B andC are relatively similar. Four-measure hypermeter is pre-served throughout reading B by a reinterpretation at the de-ceptive progression. In reading C the proliferation of themelodic idea from m. 30 is understood as expanding a singlehypermeasure; the hiatus in m. 34 functions as a fermatarather than as a hyperbeat. Reading C more closely modelsmy experience of the passage than does reading B, but in either analysis the start of the phrase maintains the same hypermetric identity as at the minuet’s opening.

The trio of op. 64, no. 2 shifts to the parallel major and tometric consonance (Example 25). The first reprise and thethematic return present eight-measure units that subdivideinto four-measure lengths; the material in the second reprisebefore the thematic return consists of a mere four-measure


Š

Ý

²²

²²

/0

/0 ¼

Łl\ Ł

ŁŁlll

ŁŁŁ

lll

ŁŁŁ

lll

Ł

ŁŁl

ll

[_

¼

¼Łl Łl

ŁŁŁ

lll

Ł

ŁŁl

ll

[_

¼

¼Łl Łl

ŁŁŁ

lll

ðð

Łðð²[

Łl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁŁ²

ll

l

lŁl

ŁŁŁŁ

llll

¼

¼

ŁŁŁŁ

llll

\ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

ll

[_

¼

¼Łl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁl

l

ll

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

ll

[_

¼

¼Łl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁl

l

ll

ŁŁŁŁ

llll

¼

¼Łl Łl

ŁŁŁŁ

l

lll Łl

Š

Ý

²²

²²ŁŁ

ŁŁl[_

l[_l

¼Ł

ŁŁl

ll

Ł

Łl

l

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

l

ll

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

ll

¼

ŁŁll

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

ll

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

l[Ł

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

lŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

lŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

lŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

l

lll

Łl

ŁŁ

Ł¼

l

l

l Łl

ŁŁ

Ł¼

ll

l Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

l

ll

l

¼

ŁŁl

l

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

l

l

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

l

l

¼

¼ (

(

2 2 2 2 2

2

3

32

3

!

!9

1initially:upbeatlater:

21 2

33

44

1(!)1 2 3

4=1 2 (1 2) 3 4

example 23. Haydn, String Quartet op. 64, no. 2, iii, 1–14: reinterpretation of a harmonized melody as a gestural upbeat.





² ²

Š

Ý

²²

²² ŁŁ

ŁŁ²

l

ll

l

Ł¼

¼

l Ł² l ŁŁ

ŁŁ

lŁŁ

ŁŁl

l

ll

Ł¼

¼

l Ł² l ŁŁŁŁ²

lŁŁ

ŁŁ²l

l

ll

¼

¼

¼

ŁŁŁŁ

ll

l

ŁŁŁ

ll

l

ŁŁŁ

lll

Ł

ŁŁl

ll

[_

¼

¼Łl Łl

ŁŁŁ

ll

l

Ł

ŁŁl

ll

[_

¼

¼Łl Łl

ŁŁŁ

ll

l

ðð

Łðð²l

[Łl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

ll

l

lŁl

ðð

Łðð

l Łl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁŁ

ll

l

lŁl

ðð

Łð

l Łl Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

l

lŁl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ²

ll

l

l

¼

¼

¼

¼

Š

Ý

²²

²² ÿ

¼ ¼ Łl\ŁŁŁ¦

lll

¼

Łl ŁlŁŁŁ

lll

ŁŁŁ¦

lll

¼

Łl ŁlŁŁŁ

lll

ŁŁŁŁ¦²

llll Łl

¼

ŁŁl

l ŁŁll

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

ll

Łl

ŁŁŁŁ¦²

llll Łl

¼

ŁŁl

l ŁŁll

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

ll

Łl

ŁŁŁŁ

²²l

ll[

l Łl

¼

ŁŁl

l ŁŁll

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

ll

Łl

ŁŁŁŁ

lll

lŁ

l

¼

Ł¼l Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

l

lŁl

ŁŁŁŁ

²l

ll

l Łl

¼

Ł¼

l Łl

ŁŁ

ŁŁ

ll

l

lŁ

l

ŁŁŁŁ

llll

¼

¼ (

(

3 3

2 2 2 2 2

2 2 3 3 3 !

!24

34

reading A:reading B:reading C:

1upbeatupbeat

=mm. 1–4

211

322

433

but phrase expanded (to m. 42)

14=14

225

336

44

111

(readingsconverge)

2 3 4 1 2 3 4

cresc.

example 24. Haydn, String Quartet op. 64, no. 2, iii, 24–42: thematic return.

Š

Ý

²²²²²

²²²²²

/0

/0 ¼

Ł

ŁŁ

ðŁ

\¼ŁŁ

¼ŁŁŁ

ŁŁ

ðŁ

¼ŁŁ

¼ŁŁŁ

ŁŁ

ðŁ

¼ŁŁ

¼ŁŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

¼ŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

Łð

ðŁ

ŁŁ

ŁŁŁŁ

² ŁŁðŁ

ý

ŁŁ

Ł

ŁŁ

Ł

¦

²

ðð

ðŁ

ýý

Ł² ŁŁ¦ Ł

ŁŁŁŁ

¼

¼ (

(

(

( ¼

Ł][

ðððð

ý² ŁŁŁ

¦Ł

Ł²

ðððŁ

ý

Ł Ł

Ł

ŁŁ¦Ł ðð

ðŁ

ý

¦ Ł Ł

Ł

ŁŁ¦ Ł²

ŁŁŁŁ

¼

¼

¼

Ł

ŁŁ

ðŁ

\¼ŁŁ²

¼ŁŁŁ

!cf. harmonic progression in mm. 1–5 of minuet

F²

1

B[C²]D²

2

C²

3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1

dolcecf. minuet:

dolce

example 25. Haydn, String Quartet op. 64, no. 2, iii, trio: hypermetric resolution amid tonal links to minuet.




prolongation of the dominant. The tonal and metric contrastsof the trio occur in the presence of a subtle motivic con-nection between the minuet and trio. In the trio, the first violin’s melody begins with the same scale degrees as in theminuet, except the passing tone in the first measure is omit-ted. The higher register, legato articulation, and mode shiftweaken this connection, but the harmonic progression rein-forces the relationship. As in the minuet, the trio moves tosupertonic harmony and then immediately to a root-positiondominant-to-tonic progression. In the trio, this progressionspans four measures and begins from a root-position tonicharmony. Thus, the hypermetric stability of the trio refer-ences the minuet’s motivic material, as if to demonstrate thetype of consonant state with which the minuet could havestarted.

conclusion

This article has explored minuets with extended upbeatgestures and documented several different ways these ges-tures interact with hypermeter. In pursuing these interac-tions, I have emphasized context. The study has focused onthe implications of the opening material for each minuet,and often on relevant connections with the trio. Rhythmic-metric structure, like tonal structure, largely accrues meaningthrough variation and development. The analyses suggestthe centrality of rhythm and meter to each movement; in allof the movements considered, these domains are pivotal for aproductive engagement with the music’s compositional logicand expressive effects.

The analyses in this study advance perspectives on currenttheoretical debates on the nature of hypermeter. My use ofhypermetric numbers and the continual reference to a four-measure hypermetric level may give the impression of arigid, grid-based conception of hypermeter, but this is notthe case. The hypermetric analyses are sensitive to changingperceptions as the music unfolds; several examples providean initial reading that is subsequently reevaluated. In other

compositions, multiple hypermetric readings are proposed.In these cases, the multiplicity of plausible readings is a sig-nificant factor in the music, even though any single perfor-mance (or mental rehearsing) will favor one hypermetricreading. A passage with some conflicting hypermetric cueshas a different effect than a stretch of music where tonal,structural, and phenomenal accents are fully coordinatedwith the hypermeter. The prose descriptions that accompanythe annotated scores access this qualitative aspect of hyper-meter. With their emphasis on gradations of hypermetricstrength, the analyses suggest that the inference of hyperme-ter arises not only through a process of temporal measure-ment, particularly in the aftermath of strongly conflictingcues. Accurately perceiving and reproducing timespans is asurvival benefit, as writings such as Hasty 1997 and London2004 emphasize, but in a musical composition much infor-mation is available to shape hypermetric response. Individualbeats and hyperbeats are differentiated not only by their position within the metric hierarchy, but also by the type ofmusical events with which they coincide. When the estab-lished meter or hypermeter is disrupted, the nature of themusical events immediately after the disruption can implythe hypermetric identity of these events, although subse-quent music may, of course, lead to a hypermetric adjust-ment. This flexible approach to hypermeter reveals the rich-ness of rhythmic-metric design in the Classical minuet andoffers interpretive gains for performers, listeners, and schol-ars who attend to hypermetric nuances in tonal music.

references

Benjamin, William. 1984. “A Theory of Musical Meter.”Music Perception 1: 355–413.

Burkhart, Charles. 1991. “How Rhythm Tells the Story in‘La ci darem la mano’.” Theory and Practice 16: 21–38.

Caplin, William. 1998. Classical Form: A Theory of FormalFunctions for the Instrumental Music of Haydn, Mozart, andBeethoven. Oxford: Oxford University Press.





Cohn, Richard. 1992a. “The Dramatization of HypermetricConflict in the Scherzo of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony.”19th-Century Music 15.3: 188–206.

———. 1992b. “Metric and Hypermetric Dissonance in theMenuetto of Mozart’s Symphony in G Minor, K. 550.”Intégral 6: 1–33.

———. 2001. “Complex Hemiolas, Ski-Hill Graphs andMetric Spaces.” Music Analysis 20.3: 295–326.

Grave, Floyd. 1995. “Metrical Dissonance in Haydn.”Journal of Musicology 13.2: 168–202.

Hasty, Christopher. 1997. Meter as Rhythm. New York:Oxford University Press.

Imbrie, Andrew. 1973. “ ‘Extra’ Measures and MetricalAmbiguity in Beethoven.” In Beethoven Studies, ed. AlanTyson, 45–66. New York: W. W. Norton.

Kamien, Roger. 1993. “Conflicting Metrical Patterns inAccompaniment and Melody in Works by Mozart andBeethoven: A Preliminary Study.” Journal of Music Theory37.2: 311–48.

Krebs, Harald. Fantasy Pieces: Metrical Dissonance in theMusic of Robert Schumann. New York: Oxford UniversityPress, 1999.

Kurth, Richard. 1999. “On the Subject of Schubert ’s‘Unfinished’ Symphony: Was beudeutet die Bewegung?”19th-Century Music 23.1: 3–32.

Lerdahl, Fred, and Ray Jackendoff. 1983. A GenerativeTheory of Tonal Music. Cambridge: MIT Press.

London, Justin. 2004. Hearing in Time: Psychological Aspectsof Musical Meter. New York: Oxford University Press.

McClelland, Ryan. 2004a. “Tonal Structure, Rhythm, Meter,and Motive in the Scherzo-Type Movements of Brahms’sChamber Music with Piano.” Ph.D. dissertation, IndianaUniversity.

———. 2004b. “Brahms’s Capriccio in C Major, Op. 76, No.8: Ambiguity, Conflict, Musical Meaning, and Per-formance.” Theory and Practice 29: 69–94.

McKee, Eric. 1999. “Influences of the Early Eighteenth-Century Social Minuet on the Minuets from J. S. Bach’s

French Suites, BWV 812–17.” Music Analysis 18.2: 235–60.

———. 2004. “Extended Anacruses in Mozart ’s Instru-mental Music.” Theory and Practice 29: 1–37.

Morgan, Robert P. 1978. “The Theory and Analysis of TonalRhythm.” Musical Quarterly 64: 435–78.

Rothstein, William. 1989. Phrase Rhythm in Tonal Music.New York: Schirmer Books.

———. 1995. “Beethoven with and without Kunstgepräng’:Metrical Ambiguity Reconsidered.” Beethoven Forum 4:165–93.

Russell, Tilden A. 1992. “The Unconventional DanceMinuet: Choreographies of the Menuet d’Exaudet.” ActaMusicologica 64.2: 118–38.

Samarotto, Frank. 1999. “Strange Dimensions: Regularityand Irregularity in Deep Levels of Rhythmic Reduc-tions.” In Schenker Studies II, ed. Carl Schachter and HediSiegel, 222–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schachter, Carl. 1987. “Rhythm and Linear Analysis:Aspects of Meter.” Music Forum 6: 1–59.

———. 2000. “Playing What the Composer Didn’t Write.”In Pianist, Scholar, Connoisseur: Essays in Honor of JacobLateiner, 47–68. Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon.

Smith, Peter H. 2001. “Brahms and the Shifting Barline:Metric Displacement and Formal Process in the Trioswith Wind Instruments.” In Brahms Studies 3, ed. DavidBrodbeck, 191–229. Lincoln: University of NebraskaPress.

Wheelock, Gretchen A. 1992. Haydn’s Ingenious Jesting withArt: Contexts of Musical Wit and Humor. New York:Schirmer Books.

Willner, Channan. 1991. “The Two-Length Bar Revisited:Handel and the Hemiola.” Göttinger Händel-Beiträge 4:208–31.

———. 1998. “Stress and Counterstress: Accentual Conflictand Reconciliation in J.S. Bach’s Instrumental Works.”Music Theory Spectrum 20.2: 280–304.





Music Theory Spectrum, Vol. 28, Issue 1, pp. 23–56, ISSN 0195-6167,electronic ISSN 1533-8339. © 2006 by The Society for Music Theory.All rights reserved. Please direct all requests for permission to photo-copy or reproduce article content through the University of CaliforniaPress’s Rights and Permissions website, at http://www.ucpress.edu/journals/rights.htm.




extended upbeats in the classical minuet interact

Documents