In In the varied first movement structures of Mozart’s piano concertos, few fall into the sonata form with more ease than K488. Its clarity of form and suave melodic style create a sublime unison that displays Mozart’s mastery of the concerto form. Its aria style melodies point to a strong operatic influence in the concerto which is seemingly contradictory to its definitive use of sonata form; other concerti by Mozart display highly evolved use of the da capo aria form which is perhaps why they do not all fit the sonata form mould and are at times difficult to classify in respect to form. The melodic material that is so homogenous throughout the first movement would not be out of place in Figaro, indeed the concerto was composed within the six week period between the completion of The Marriage of Figaro and its first performance. The gracious character of the concerto is starkly contrasting to the galant style of Mozart’s preceding concerto K482 and is perhaps an overflow of inspiration from Figaro. The orchestra is without trumpets or drums and utilizes the woodwinds to enhance the long languorous lines that create such a beautiful flow throughout the movement.
The form of the work is true to sonata form with a double exposition. One might be inclined to label the first orchestral exposition as a ritornello, however, the un-altered sonata form structure of the movement gives good reason to class the opening as the first exposition of a double exposition. Just as Corelli’s concerto grosso compositions could be viewed as orchestrated trio sonatas the first movement of K488 seems to be an orchestrated piano sonata, albeit a highly sophisticated one. Of course the strong influence of the da capo aria form can still be seen in this movement and perhaps it is slightly obtuse to catagorize it solely as a sonata form derivative. The use of the orchestra in what could easily be described as ritornello sections is very prominent with the orchestra functioning along similar lines as one might find in Vivaldi or Bach. The defining differences, however, are the harmonic layout in the form and the two distinct subjects which are used just as would be expected in sonata form. Both forms share similarities and it is perhaps wise to be mindful of both influences when analyzing the movement.
The orchestration that is used is ingeniously devised and it is impossible to imagine a different coupling between the soloist and orchestra. The architectural perfection is not only due to the harmonic and melodic structuring of the movement but it is also achieved from the balanced interplay and interaction of the orchestra. An overwhelming aspect of this movement is the flow of the musical ideas and character from the first note to the last and the constant sharing of themes and melodies between the orchestra and soloist. The orchestration is the vehicle which Mozart employs to continue the flow throughout the movement. Both the orchestra and soloist assume a variety of roles throughout; both are used independently, as accompaniment and interactively with one another. These roles are constantly varied and Mozart’s genius lies in the distribution of these varied uses. The listener is constantly reminded of how an aria may be accompanied in an opera, the gracious melodies and subtle use of the orchestra seem to taken straight out of Figaro.
The melodic material is wonderfully homogenous throughout the movement which contributes to the overall flow. The first subject, gentle and lilting in nature does not differ too much from the feminine second subject. Mozart flirts with the use of the relative minor, which he explores further in the development, however the majority of the material, including the very extended cadential sections leading up to the development in the exposition and the cadenza in the recapitulation, are derivations of the first and second subject. Perhaps the only break in the flow of the movement comes with the cadenza. A new theme is introduced by the clarinet in the development and this theme seems to be the only link attaching the cadenza to this work at all. The cadenza juts out somewhat from the movement as it is only loosely attached to the rest of the movement’s thematic material. One is lead to question if this cadenza was actually ‘stuck in’ or quite possibly composed by, or in aid of, one of Mozart’s students. His reputation for improvising cadenzas is well known and the inclusion of a written out cadenza only a formality. In any case the cadenza does break the flow of the work which had previously been so ingeniously connected.
The influence of opera which is such an overriding influence in the development of the concerto form is in plain view in this concerto. Other concerto’s by Mozart may lean to a more symphonic nature or even lean towards a more instrumental or virtuosic approach. This work however, is a wonderful example of how Mozart has ’instrumentalized’ an operatic aria.
the varied first movement structures of Mozart’s piano concertos, few fall into the sonata form with more ease than K488. Its clarity of form and suave melodic style create a sublime unison that displays Mozart’s mastery of the concerto form. Its aria style melodies point to a strong operatic influence in the concerto which is seemingly contradictory to its definitive use of sonata form; other concerti by Mozart display highly evolved use of the da capo aria form which is perhaps why they do not all fit the sonata form mould and are at times difficult to classify in respect to form. The melodic material that is so homogenous throughout the first movement would not be out of place in Figaro, indeed the concerto was composed within the six week period between the completion of The Marriage of Figaro and its first performance. The gracious character of the concerto is starkly contrasting to the galant style of Mozart’s preceding concerto K482 and is perhaps an overflow of inspiration from Figaro. The orchestra is without trumpets or drums and utilizes the woodwinds to enhance the long languorous lines that create such a beautiful flow throughout the movement.
The form of the work is true to sonata form with a double exposition. One might be inclined to label the first orchestral exposition as a ritornello, however, the un-altered sonata form structure of the movement gives good reason to class the opening as the first exposition of a double exposition. Just as Corelli’s concerto grosso compositions could be viewed as orchestrated trio sonatas the first movement of K488 seems to be an orchestrated piano sonata, albeit a highly sophisticated one. Of course the strong influence of the da capo aria form can still be seen in this movement and perhaps it is slightly obtuse to catagorize it solely as a sonata form derivative. The use of the orchestra in what could easily be described as ritornello sections is very prominent with the orchestra functioning along similar lines as one might find in Vivaldi or Bach. The defining differences, however, are the harmonic layout in the form and the two distinct subjects which are used just as would be expected in sonata form. Both forms share similarities and it is perhaps wise to be mindful of both influences when analyzing the movement.
The orchestration that is used is ingeniously devised and it is impossible to imagine a different coupling between the soloist and orchestra. The architectural perfection is not only due to the harmonic and melodic structuring of the movement but it is also achieved from the balanced interplay and interaction of the orchestra. An overwhelming aspect of this movement is the flow of the musical ideas and character from the first note to the last and the constant sharing of themes and melodies between the orchestra and soloist. The orchestration is the vehicle which Mozart employs to continue the flow throughout the movement. Both the orchestra and soloist assume a variety of roles throughout; both are used independently, as accompaniment and interactively with one another. These roles are constantly varied and Mozart’s genius lies in the distribution of these varied uses. The listener is constantly reminded of how an aria may be accompanied in an opera, the gracious melodies and subtle use of the orchestra seem to taken straight out of Figaro.
The melodic material is wonderfully homogenous throughout the movement which contributes to the overall flow. The first subject, gentle and lilting in nature does not differ too much from the feminine second subject. Mozart flirts with the use of the relative minor, which he explores further in the development, however the majority of the material, including the very extended cadential sections leading up to the development in the exposition and the cadenza in the recapitulation, are derivations of the first and second subject. Perhaps the only break in the flow of the movement comes with the cadenza. A new theme is introduced by the clarinet in the development and this theme seems to be the only link attaching the cadenza to this work at all. The cadenza juts out somewhat from the movement as it is only loosely attached to the rest of the movement’s thematic material. One is lead to question if this cadenza was actually ‘stuck in’ or quite possibly composed by, or in aid of, one of Mozart’s students. His reputation for improvising cadenzas is well known and the inclusion of a written out cadenza only a formality. In any case the cadenza does break the flow of the work which had previously been so ingeniously connected.
The influence of opera which is such an overriding influence in the development of the concerto form is in plain view in this concerto. Other concerto’s by Mozart may lean to a more symphonic nature or even lean towards a more instrumental or virtuosic approach. This work however, is a wonderful example of how Mozart has ’instrumentalized’ an operatic aria.
