This is a - is a chord tone.
So we just, we don't have to analyze it.
And, and in such a in such a case you know this this is really
our bass note and Beethoven's just decorating up like this some might say,
"Oh then you have to analyze this as like a two diminished six-four chord."
No, you don't.
We know we really getting the chord,
the harmonic rhythm is by beat.
And so it makes sense to just keep the harmonic rhythm the same.
There's no useful information given about the chord.
If we say that it's a six-four chord,
again we need to analyze it as some kind of six-four chord.
Is it a pedal six-four? Passing six-four?
Cadential six-four? It's none of the above.
So, in this case we just say that it's,
you know, it's just decoration,
it's just the movement of the bass.
This is gonna give us a one-six-four.
Not so clear again and this is going to get us five and then one,
I'll just write this in very quickly and we'll look at this.
One-six-four. And you say, "Well,
I'm not getting that because I'm getting five with a passing tone.
And then this is a one-six-four resolving down to a five.
So, the one-six-four takes place here I get that."
No, actually what's-what's going here is that this is actually
the... you probably treat this as a suspension so we get the- sorry.
Non-chord terms just for this bar 'cause all of this is
the same so we don't need to redo it but just for
this bar or this is gonna be the same as before. Okay.
But then we get this suspension,
and how do we describe the suspension?
Well honestly I'm not gonna try to,
I'm just gonna write down this as
suspension 'cause we don't really have a thing called a five-four
suspension but this really is sounding like a one-six-four,
it's missing the B flat but it's being hinted at,
the one-six-four is being hinted at so I just write this down as a suspension and
then we've got this carried over which is a four-three suspension.
Dud. Whoops. No. Or sud, no. How about sus.
Good. A four-three suspension.
And then resolving here.
This is how I would go about analyzing this again.
There are theorists that would come out and argue against
this analysis but I think when I listen to it I really hear
this too diminished six going to
one-six-four going to five going to one and then I need to start
explaining what's going on here and this is how I would explain the non-chord tones here.
There's one last thing I wanna talk about.
Some people might be a little confused.
So, I wanna clear up any confusion.
Well, I hope I can clear up confusion.
I call this a half cadence and then I went ahead and,
I went ahead and said this was
a secondary dominant and this was the dominant going to the tonic.
And so you say, you know in a way you say,
well this is a dominant going to the tonic,
isn't that a perfect authentic cadence?
Or at least in this case.
Well this is in first inversion and this is in the root.
So, we could say it's at least an imperfect authentic cadence.
Shouldn't you analyze it that way?
No. There will be times where that happens.
But in this case it doesn't make sense to do that.
Why?
We are not using the secondary dominant as a way to change key.
You'll find actually in classical music this is exactly how we
do change keys through the use of secondary dominants.
But here it's so brief and it's really just an act
of chromaticism inside of the original key.
When we get here we really do hear this as
a half cadence and then we need to explain it as a half cadence.
In this case it makes more sense to think about this chord as a kind of
altered two chord and that it's,
but in it's alteration it has this sort of secondary dominant function.
And then we land here.
We really do need to use our ears when we do analysis.
There will be times where you'll see a bunch of these
happening and then we get this and it sounds
like either an imperfect or perfect authentic cadence
and then we need to analyze it as such.
But when we land here this really sounds like a half cadence.
So it makes much more sense to analyze it as a half cadence.