Donward arpeggiated motion in the bass and annotation of inversion

[allorens]

There are cases where the upper voices remain on the same notes and it is the bass the only that moves. In general, one need to decide whether or not to annotate a different inversion for each of the bass notes (I'd say no). If the motion in the bass is upward, it might be easy to decide. When the bass goes down in the arpeggio, one has three options:

• annotate all inversions
  

• annotate the inversion that appears first
  

• annotate the inversion that appears last so to be faithful to the voice-leading towards the following chord. In this case, where? over the first or over the last note of the arpeggio?
  

• aanotate the first an the last inversions
  

Source: Dirò che fida sei from D.N. Sarro's Didone abbandonata (1730)

Further examples coming

[allorens]

Same with stepwise motion

Source: Fra lo splendor del trono from D.N. Sarro's Didone abbandonata (1730)

[johentsch]

Great comment, I've been wondering about this many times! Not sure whether we can up with a rule that always holds but a recommendation or at least collecting a couple of examples and documenting the common decisions should be feasible.

[johentsch]

The dominant on b. 2 is another edge case: Is A the bass note or F?

Pergolesi - Stabat Mater, 03. O quam tristis, m. 7

[UliKneisel]

I´d suggest, that A is the bass note here, whereas F is only an embellishment (although it would be the fundamental bass note) or more precisely ein "ausgeworfener Grundton" as Schenker would call it (fr. Satz §247).

From having a quick view over my annotations so far, it would be a rare occasion in the Pergolesi Stabat Mater for a V7 chord to appear without a preparation of the 7, whereas the V65 seems to be used quite frequently, as Hans Aerts also showed in his article on Semidissonanzen (https://www.gmth.de/zeitschrift/artikel/1023.aspx).

[johentsch]

Is your view of F as an ornament to be disregarded so strong that you would be opposed to annotating ambiguity (V65-V7)?

There is another example which I'd like to throw in the discussion. It's not really an arpeggiated bass but as comparison in order to find a consistent guideline for deciding on the bass note; the beginning of Pergolesi's Stabat Mater:

Personally, I have a strong tendency to hear half-note bass notes embellished by their upper third, rather than first inversion chords on the offbeats, in particular where the root does not progress by a fourth or fifth. For me, the main argument for annotating sixth chords would be a look into a score with figured bass (e.g. this one) where 6 figures can be found on the offbeats except m.1, b. 2. If there weren't any, however, I would be inclined to assume bass=root for every half measure. Would you other people have a strong opinion on expecting sixth chord annotations even if there weren't any figures or how would you think about ambiguous annotation in these places (e.g., i6-i in m. 2 b. 2)?

I can think of three aspects that we could consider in this decision (and in similar cases):

• Figured bass if we have one written by the composer (always a bit shaky since it says what to play, for sure, but it's less certain to which extant a figure says how the chord is "meant").
• typical bass progressions and patterns, "how we hear it" based on experience
  • the bass motif is, of course, ubiquitous and maybe we can make a decision on it for good
  • annotating the third in the bass, to me, is more convincing where it integrates in a melodic pattern (i.e. where it is more consequential and therefore has less of an ornamental character), e.g. when continuing in an upwards movement (1-3-4 (mm. 1 to 2), 1-3-5, or 1-3-6), than when it continues otherwise (1-3-2(mm. 3-4),1-3-5,` (m. 1)).
  • the bass motif is ever-repeating and therefore quite autonomous, which strengthens my interpretation of a four-8ths-ornament of a half-note root.
• an assumed harmonic rhythm for the entire passage (e.g. by imagining what rhythmic reduction of the bass would characterize the music best, plain half notes, quarter notes) and annotating accordingly.

In the very first example of this issue I am strongly opposed to assuming any change of harmony on b. 2, so the question, for me, concerns only beats 3 and 4 and I consider the best solutions to be IV6 IV and just IV on beat 3, although I would tend to the first one, which is more faithful.

What other aspects could we include in the discussion? Wouldn't it be easiest, in cases where annotator and reviewer have diverging opinions on a similar passage, to go for ambiguous annotation? Of course, I would be happy if we found strong arguments for a particular solution that can be used as a general guideline...

[allorens]

I think articulation and/or beaming can also indicate whether there's a change of fundamental note or not. In the example from Pergolesi's Stabat Mater, it seems to me that each group of 4 quavers are meant to be treated as a group. Therefore, for me the first note of the group would be taken as the bass. In any case, I'd always maintain a constant harmonic rhythm across such passages.

In the previous cases, I wonder whether we all perceive the last note of the downward arpeggio or stepwise motive more clearly as the bass. I do, and I think it's due to its direct connection to the following harmony. Also in the 3/8 example I included on 10 July I tend to feel the first 2 notes of each bar as appogiaturas. When the motion goes upwards, however, I tend to perceive the first note of the bar as the strongest harmonically.

(In the first example I marked a change of harmony in b.2 because of the harmonic and motivic configuration of the whole piece: constant motive/phrase starts on second beats.)