Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Castelnuovo-Tedesco 1
Castelnuovo-Tedesco 1
EDITION
by
__________________________
2020
2
As members of the Doctor of Musical Arts Document Committee, we certify that we have read
the document prepared by:
titled:
and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the document requirement for the Degree of
Doctor of Musical Arts.
I hereby certify that I have read this document prepared under my direction and recommend that
it be accepted as fulfilling the document requirement.
ACKNOWLEDGEMETS
I want to express my gratitude to the people that have been involved and helped in
To my committee members: Dr. Philip Alejo, and Professor Timothy Kantor for their
To Dr. Janet Sturman for the invaluable support and counsel during my doctorate
journey.
To Dr. José Luis Puerta and Dr. John Brobeck for their endless assistance and prompt
advice.
Dr. Gabriel Navia for his help with the music analysis, and to Julia Pernet for her
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. 6
The collaborative relationship between Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco and Andrés Segovia .......... 7
Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 30
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 92
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................. 94
BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................................................................................ 98
6
ABSTRACT
is considered as one of the most important sonatas for guitar of the twentieth century,
composed at the request of Spanish guitarist Andrés Segovia (1893-1987). Until recently,
the standard edition of Sonata Omaggio a Boccherini, op. 77 was only available in
Segovia´s edited version published by Schott, yet the discovery of the autograph and the
publication of this facsimile makes it possible to reassess Tedesco’s original intentions for
this work. This document provides an insight into the collaborative relationship between
Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco and Andrés Segovia and the creative process through the
realization of this Sonata. This study will examine and compare the existing sources of
Sonata Omaggio a Boccherini, op. 77 to offer performers with a critical view of the work.
The comparison will discuss primarily the criteria Segovia used in his edition; the
differences between the two main existing sources of the work (i.e. Tedesco’s manuscript
and Segovia’s edition); and the practicality of its performance. In addition, this document
composers for the classical guitar in the twentieth century. His musical production is vast,
and music written for the guitar forms a sizeable portion of his compositional output. 1 A
considerable number of his guitar works are frequently performed and recorded worldwide,
and some of them have become part of the canon of the modern guitar. Along with Manuel
M. Ponce, Federico Moreno Torroba, Joaquín Turina and Heitor Villa-Lobos, Castelnuovo-
Tedesco was among the composers who built a collaborative relationship with Andrés
Segovia (1893-1987), which resulted in a flourishing creation process and a new repertoire
for the classical guitar. Tedesco was one of those composers who “aided Andrés Segovia in
his mission to expand the guitar’s repertoire beyond the meager collection available at the
beginning of Segovia’s long career by composing many works expressly for him. All of
music festival in Venice, Italy. Their relationship began with the composition of a first
guitar work: Variations à travers les siècles, op. 71 (1932). To the delight of Segovia,
Tedesco proved to be quite proficient in writing for the guitar. “The guitarist was so
satisfied that he played the work in all of his concerts that season, and thereafter, Segovia
1
Peter Higham, "Castelnuovo-Tedesco's Works for Guitar" (MM thesis, University of Alberta,
Canada, 1977), 1.
2
Matthew Michael Anderson, “An Analysis and Performance Edition of Mario Castelnuovo-
Tedesco´s Rondo for Guitar, Op. 129” (DMA diss., University of Georgia, 2011), 1.
8
annually requested a new composition from the Maestro.” 3 The relationship between these
musicians was long and prolific and lasted until Tedesco´s death in 1968.
resulted in a considerable number of guitar works that were expressly composed for the
illustrious Spanish guitarist. Over a period of about three decades, Tedesco composed
works that would become Segovia´s regular repertoire and that eventually turned out to be
standard repertoire for all classical guitarists. The guitar works composed by Tedesco
during those years were molded at Segovia´s request and to his musical taste and were
Tedesco´s compositions for guitar is provided. 4 This list indicates the works that were
that not all of Castelnuovo-Tedesco´s guitar compositions were written only for Segovia.
A number of works composed for and with guitar were written for other guitarists who
3
Stephen A. Gray, “The Solo Guitar Music of Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco: A Survey” (MM thesis,
San Jose State University, 1978), 23.
4
A complete list of guitar works is provided as an Appendix at the end of this document.
9
Capriccio Diabolico Omaggio a Paganini (Guitar and orchestra), op. 85a (1945)
Concerto Sereno (Secondo concerto in Do) per chitarra e orchestra, op. 160 (1953)
Tonadilla sur le nom de Andrés Segovia pour guitare seul, op. 170 no. 5 (1954)
Tedesco´s early guitar works were composed between the years 1932 through 1939,
at the beginning of a lifelong collaboration with Andrés Segovia and before Tedesco´s
permanent migration to the United States at the outbreak of the Second World War in
Europe, in 1939. The guitar works from this period are among Tedesco´s most important
compositions for the instrument. Sonata Omaggio a Boccherini, op. 77, Capriccio
Diabolico, op. 85, and Tarantella, op. 87a, along with the Concerto in D for guitar and
orchestra op. 99 are widely considered as his finest compositions, and are frequently found
An interesting aspect regarding these early works is the fact that some of the
manuscript scores of Tedesco´s guitar music from that period remained missing for years.
Only recently, after the opening of the Andrés Segovia archives in Linares, Spain, the
manuscript scores of many works that were written for Segovia were discovered and
published, including the manuscripts of works such as Sonata Omaggio a Boccherini op.
77, Tarantella op. 87, and Capriccio Diabolico op. 85. In the light of these discoveries, it is
now possible to assert that the manuscripts reveal alterations in the Segovia editions.
sonatas written for guitar in the first half of the twentieth century. Its length, treatment of
its thematic material and overall design make it stand out when compared to other guitar
sonatas of the same period. Omaggio a Boccherini is comparable in stature to the guitar
sonatas composed by Antonio José (1933) and Joan Manén (1929). Other sonatas from the
same period by composers such as Manuel M. Ponce and Joaquín Turina, are generally
5
more brief and concise in their treatment of sonata form.
Capriccio Diabolico op. 85 (1935) and Tarantella op. 87a (1936) are also some of
Tedesco´s emblematic masterpieces. Both works became standard works for Segovia, in
which he displayed his characteristic sound and phrasing. “The Capriccio Diabolico was,
like others, the response to a precise request from Andrés Segovia, who had suggested that
the composer should write a tribute to Paganini. Segovia was quick to perform both the
Capriccio Diabolico and the Tarantella in his concerts, works that became part of the core
5
Corey E. Whitehead, “Antonio José Martínez Palacios´ Sonata for Guitar (1933): An Analysis,
Performer´s Guide and New Performer´s Edition” (DMA Document, University of Arizona, 2002), 31.
.
11
composer and guitarist was generated by Segovia´s modifications to the original manuscript
of Capriccio Diabolico:
The present writer received letters in which [Tedesco] clearly expressed his desire
that other guitarists should see the original scores prior to their publication with
Segovia's corrections, which he always considered had been forcibly extracted from
him, even though he naturally had unconditioned respect for Segovia…. The
changes made by Segovia - aimed at making certain passages more fluent and
cantabile to suit his style of playing - led to a sort of de-structuring of the piece, and
since Castelnuovo-Tedesco was a composer who never wrote a single note without
it having a precise reason for being there, one can easily understand that the overall
shape of the piece was weakened. This left the composer dissatisfied and in 1945 he
attempted to recover the work by preparing a version for guitar and orchestra (op.
85/2). 7
work for solo guitar. 8 Along with Capriccio Diabolico, Tarantella appeared to be heavily
corrected by Segovia. Angelo Gilardino´s edition based on the original manuscripts of both
works reveals and explains Tedesco´s original intentions, along with Segovia´s
modifications.
In 1939, prior to departing to the United States, Tedesco composed his Concerto in
D, op. 99. It is important to note that this was the first concerto written for Segovia, and it
remains among the three or four concertos most often performed. These early works
became part of the core repertoire of Segovia, who not only made the world premieres but
also made the first recordings and would continue to perform them throughout his career.
6
Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco, Capricho Diabolico and Tarantelle, New edition based on the
original manuscripts, eds. Angelo Gilardino and Luigi Biscaldi (Milan: Ricordi, 2006), 1.
7
Ibid., 2.
8
Ibid., 4.
12
request for a new work arrived soon with the added suggestion: “your great countryman,
Boccherini, loved the guitar very much and he wrote for this instrument. Why not compose
a work in homage to Boccherini? I would like you to compose an important piece of music:
a sonata in four movements of different tempi.” 9 This request by Segovia follows one of his
main artistic goals: the commission of new, large-scale guitar works that would contribute
to position the guitar as a serious concert instrument. Sonata Omaggio a Boccherini, op. 77
belongs to a period when Segovia commissioned a series of works in sonata form from
various composers including Manuel M. Ponce (1882-1948) and Joaquín Turina (1882-
1949).
Tedesco promptly started composing, and he wrote the sonata between November
1934 and March 1935. About the Sonata Omaggio a Boccherini, op. 77, Peter Higham
states:
Angelo Gilardino, “Osservazioni sulla Sonata op. 77 Omaggio a Boccherini di Mario Castelnuovo-
9
Peter Higham, “Castelnuovo-Tedesco’s Works for Guitar” (MM thesis, University of Alberta,
10
Upon completion of the Sonata Omaggio a Boccherini, op. 77, Tedesco sent it to
Andrés Segovia (at the time living in Barcelona, Spain) who revised and provided
fingerings for the Schott-Mainz edition, who published it in 1935 as part of the “Gitarren
the marking “Fingered by Andrés Segovia,” has become the standard edition of this work,
Tedesco was already a mature composer by the time he started his relationship with
Segovia. Neither a guitarist nor familiar with guitar writing at that time, he learned the
features of the instrument with the aid of Segovia and soon started composing for the
guitar. During the composition process, Tedesco often wrote to Segovia to discuss his
guitar writing. Segovia would propose adjustments to a particular work in process, in most
cases to make it more idiomatic for the guitar. Peter Segal comments on this fruitful
who could write in a style which agreed with his tastes but who was unable to subsume his
personality beneath that of the guitarist." 11 This assertion demonstrates that Tedesco was
someone who wanted to keep the integrity of his works. At times, however, Segovia
initiated changes without consulting Tedesco, “aimed at making certain passages more
fluent and cantabile to suit his style of playing," and he adjusted said passages to his
technical skill and/or musical taste. 12 In addition to fingerings, some of the collaborative
scores reveal substantial musical alterations. These modifications are reflected in elements
11
Peter E. Segal, “The Role of Andrés Segovia in Re-Shaping the Repertoire of the Classical Guitar”
(D.M.A. diss., Temple University, 1994), 74.
12
Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco, Capricho Diabolico and Tarantelle, 2.
14
such as chord re-voicings, note omissions, note changes, harmony and counterpoint
deletion, arpeggio edits and melodic modifications, and sometimes even the deletion of
During the creative process of Sonata op. 77, there was an exchange of letters in
which both composer and performer would discuss the overall shaping of the work. In a
letter to Andrés Segovia, dated on December 12th, 1934, Tedesco comments on several
points:
My dear Andres.
Thank you for your letter. I went over the "Sonata ", and indeed I had almost
forgotten it over these last months ..., it still impresses me as being quite all right. I
re-edited the arpeggios in the '"Andantino- and hope that by lifting them one octave
higher they may sound better. I added a few chords in the closing section of the
"Finale" you'll choose from among the three versions as best suits you). I think that
should do.
I am hesitant as to what / should do with the "Minuetto": the "Trio" and the repeat
are indeed a bit shorter (I had told you so from the very outset ... ), above all if one
deals with them separately; yet, since the other movements are rather long, it is not
altogether to be regretted the "Minuetto" isn't too stretched out. At any rate, I will
lengthen the repeat and I'll do so by playing from Tempo to page 6 (instead of page
9) up to the sign /. Should you wish the Trio as well to be longer, I'd suggest a
"double” of the "Trio”, which I wrote on page 9bis. It´s charming enough, I believe,
but I frankly don´t know whether it would sound better on the higher or in the lower
octave (perhaps it would be best played once on the treble notes and once an octave
lower): after all it is all a matter of taste and of sonority, and I leave this matter
entirely in your hands.
Needless to say I'd be delighted if you recorded the "Minuetto" and the "Finale": it
is such a rare joy to hear you perform that it will be a real treat to have you play, as
it were... at home.
Send me the final draft whenever you have it ready.
Meantime kindly present my greetings to Mrs. Segovia along with my warmest and
affectionate feelings for you.
Yours, Mario.13
Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco, Sonata “Omaggio a Boccherini,” op. 77, ed. Angelo Gilardino
13
Taking into consideration that Sonata op. 77 was only the second guitar work by
Tedesco and that at this time, his relationship with Segovia was still incipient, it can be
inferred that Segovia might have felt at liberty to amend Tedesco´s score to his personal
taste, as he often would proceed with works that were written for him. Eager to premiere
this music, it seems as if Segovia was prompt in revising and sending to publication,
without further discussion and final check by Tedesco, even though the composer had
requested Segovia to “send him a draft whenever is ready.” In the foreword to the new
14
Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco, Capricho Diabolico and Tarantelle, 9.
15
Ibid., 9.
16
After Sonata op. 77, Capriccio Diabolico and Tarantella were the following
guitar works that Tedesco wrote for Segovia. Bearing in mind the chronological
regarding the latter works, it is reasonable to think that during the creation process of
Sonata op. 77 some things might have not been thoroughly discussed, and that even
though Tedesco might have abided to Segovia´s editing, perhaps he did so not entirely
convinced.
It is also important to mention that, although Sonata op. 77 does not appear to
have been drastically altered when compared to Capriccio Diabolico, the revisions made
by Segovia are not to be ignored nor can they considered to be irrelevant in the overall
along with an examination of the manuscript score becomes necessary for the purpose of
this study.
The role of Andrés Segovia in creating a new repertoire was critical in realizing his
dream for the guitar to be considered a serious concert instrument. This new repertoire,
along with Segovia´s virtuosity and charisma, attracted larger and larger crowds in major
concert halls, which generated enthusiasm among composers to write guitar music.
engaged in collaboration with composers that he deemed would write music according to
The relationships with the composers who wrote music for Segovia would be a
symbiosis in which Segovia played the role of “the instrumental virtuoso/interpreter who
and publishing musical compositions. As a result of Segovia´s immense appetite for new
repertoire, this process was repeated countless times to the point that the guitar´s literature
17
would undergo a dramatic change.” Many of the works that Segovia commissioned
during the first half of the twentieth century, particularly between the 1920s and 1930s,
became the core of his repertoire. Notable compositions from this period include the four
guitar sonatas and Variations sur La Folia de España et Fugue by Manuel M. Ponce,
Joaquín Turina´s Sevillana (Fantasía) and Sonata op. 61, and Sonatina by Federico
Moreno Torroba, among others. In addition to premiering these new works, Segovia would
subsequently publish and record the music which generated further interest and enthusiasm
for the instrument. These activities “…constituted a turning point in the complexion of the
18
guitar repertoire which characterizes the instrument to this day.” Segovia´s position as
the pre-eminent guitarist of the twentieth century stands unchallenged. His role in the
19
development of the literature of the instrument is not without criticism, however.
16
Within the context of the 20th-century, Segovia is considered in a general sense as a conservative.
17
Segal, 5.
18
Ibid., 19.
19
Ibid., 5.
18
Segovia´s role as a music editor is critical to the understanding of the repertoire that
he commissioned. Most of the works that were written for Segovia were published only
after his revisions. In his editions published by Schott, Segovia provided fingerings, as well
as string indications. His editorial decisions clearly portrayed his aesthetics and provide an
insight into his style as a performer and his approach to phrasing and tone color. His
editorial work has raised interest and at times controversy from guitarists and scholars
alike.
The work of guitarists and musicologists in discovering and publishing the original
manuscripts has revealed that Segovia had a history of making significant editorial changes
to the music. It seems as if “the intersection between composer and performer was not
always clearly defined. While each performs a necessary function in the creative process, a
question arises when the creativity of the one is interfered with by the self-interests of the
other.” 20
Ponce, whose collaboration with Segovia preceded Tedesco´s by nearly a decade, reveals
the extent of Segovia´s revisions. In the prologue to Ponce´s Complete Works for Guitar
20
Ibid., 36.
19
order to restore it, whenever possible, to its original form, and in some cases
to reconstruct something that does not exist anymore. Also a text may be
accepted in good faith and by getting used to it, in spite of its lack of
authenticity, it may often be preferred to the authentic and true version
because of the familiarity that has been established. All this is applicable to
the case of Ponce, which is why I have tried to make known the original
version of his guitar works, which explains why when playing his music one
feels, sooner or later, that something is missing, that something is not right
and in the end one finds out that the original conception was changed. 21
Segovia editions of Manuel M. Ponce. For instance, in Sonatina Meridional, Segovia takes
several liberties that may have gone beyond the composer´s intentions. Segovia’s
Segovia made changes to the arrangements of chords, added notes, and in some instances
made modifications to the rhythmic structures. Some of the notable differences appear in
21
Miguel Alcázar, Obra completa para guitarra de Manuel M. Ponce de acuerdo a los manuscritos
originales (Mexico: Conaculta, 2000), 10-11.
20
212. 22
m. 209
When one compares the two excerpts, it is evident that Segovia’s modifications
stray significantly from the original. The major change he makes is that he transposes the
entire passage down by a perfect fourth: in measure 209, Ponce writes a D Major triad over
an A pedal and continues the sequence from there. By contrast, Segovia lowers the chord to
A Major with an E pedal and finishes the sequence. Furthermore, besides adding an
animando e crescendo indication, Segovia adds accents in measures 210 and 212, and he
extends the length of the lower pedal notes by an eighth beat. Although the rhythmic
changes and the articulation markings might be stylistic preferences that a performer would
22
Manuel M. Ponce, Sonatina Meridional, ed. Andrés Segovia (Mainz: Schott, 1939), M. I, mm.
209-212.
23
Manuel M. Ponce, Sonatina Meridional, ed. Tilman Hoppstock (Mainz: Schott, 2006), M. I, mm.
209-212.
21
make as a part of their interpretation of the work, the totality of Segovia's modifications
Also, in the first movement of this work, Segovia adds notes, perhaps to make the
passage more melodic. In measures 79-82, one can see how Segovia adds notes to the
downbeat chords and divides eighth notes into sixteenth notes. The following two examples
show these marked differences between the original and Segovia's edition.
In Movement III, Segovia modifies the musical structure of measures 2-4 with the
addition of notes to fill in harmonies and makes a rhythmic modification to the chords of
24
Segovia, Sonatina Meridional, M. I, mm. 73-85.
25
Hoppstock, Sonatina Meridional, M. I, mm. 79-82.
22
accordance with the title “Meridional”, referring to the southern regions of Spain, including
Musical Example 5. Manuscript version Sonatina Meridional Movement III, mm. 2-4. 26
Not only did Segovia alter existing material in Sonatina Meridional, but he also
added more measures to lengthen the piece. In his published edition, four new measures
have been added after bar 139. Musical Examples 7 and 8 clearly show this addition.
26
Hoppstock, Sonatina Meridional, M. III, mm. 2-4.
27
Segovia, Sonatina Meridional, M. III, mm. 2-4.
23
Musical Example 7. Segovia’s edition of Sonatina Meridional Movement III, mm. 136-
150. 28
m. 139
m. 139
Segovia appears to add these measures to extend the melodic material and delay the
arrival of the new section in measure 140. Segovia essentially repeats measures 136-139
28
Segovia, Sonatina Meridional, M. III, mm. 136-150.
29
Hoppstock, Sonatina Meridional, M. III, mm. 136-148.
24
but changes the melodic line of the first two measures. These changes result in an
embellishment of sorts, and he uses the repeated high F# in measures 140 and 141 to create
melodic and harmonic tension against the G in the sustained chords, which emphasizes the
arrival of measure 140 in Ponce's score. These changes create a very different effect when
The facsimile score of Sonata op. 77 Omaggio a Boccherini was discovered in 2001
by the Italian composer and scholar Angelo Gilardino. In the foreword to this edition,
I managed to collect all of [Tedesco´s] works for guitar, with the exception of his
scores for solo guitar dating back to the days when he still lived in Italy, between
1932 (the year he wrote his 1rst piece for guitar) and 1939, when he moved to the
States. In spite of my requests, the composer never sent me the manuscripts of the
Variazioni attraverso i secoli, the Sonata ("Omaggio a Boccherini "), the Capriccio
diabolico ("Omaggio a Paganini"), the Tarantella, or the piece entitled Aranci in
flore ("Orange blossoms"). I felt it would have been less than tactful if I had asked
him the reason why. I guessed that in the stir and bustle of his moving first from
Italy to New York and to Larchmont, and then from there to California, much had
been lost, so I avoided asking any further. Now I know he did not send me those
manuscripts simply because he no longer had them. Not that he had lost them;
instead he had handed or sent them to Segovia. After settling down in the States the
composer no longer gave his original manuscripts to any performer. He handed
them blueprinted copies instead. This explains why at the Andrés Segovia archives
all of Castelnuovo- Tedesco's music composed in the States is made up of
xerographs. Finding the original manuscripts of the Variazioni attraverso i secoli
and of the Sonata was a sheer stroke of luck. - The retrieval of the original versions
allows us to fully grasp the gist of these compositions and thus read them without
having to necessarily adopt Segovia's editing…When in May 2001, in Linares
(Spain), I came across the original manuscript, I was not at all surprised to read on
the title page the word Sonatina rather than Sonata…As was his custom, Segovia
did not send the publisher the composer’s manuscript, but a copy drafted by him,
with his own fingering on it. This is the reason why the composer’s manuscript was
still among Segovia’s papers from 1934, as I found it in 2001. Schott’s edition was
25
copyrighted in 1935, so Segovia did not put too much time between its first
performance and publication. One thing is sure: besides himself, no other guitarist
in those days could have cleared the technical hitches of such a challenging piece of
music. 30
The fact that Segovia did not send the composer´s manuscript, but a copy drafted
and fingered by himself to Schott is the reason why this manuscript was not found in
Castelnuovo-Tedesco´s archives. For a very long time, no one had access to this manuscript
score, and therefore comparing it with Segovia´s version had not been possible until
recently.
30
Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco, Sonata “Omaggio a Boccherini,” 4-6.
26
While at times he used some modern techniques such as serialism, most often the formal,
seldom strays dramatically away from classical or romantic style. In fact, “Tedesco always
maintained tonal frameworks and a melodic lyricism in his music that in turn caused critics
The works Castelnuovo-Tedesco composed for Segovia at the initial stages of their
relationship were written in the neo-classical/neo-romantic style. During this period, and at
the request of Segovia, Tedesco composed his two homages to eighteenth and nineteenth-
century Italian composers, Luigi Boccherini, Sonata Omaggio a Boccherini, op. 77 (1934),
and Nicolo Paganini, Capriccio Diabolico Omaggio a Paganini (1935). Regarding these
31
David S. Asbury, “20th Century Romantic Serialism: The Opus 170 Greeting Cards of Mario
Castelnuovo-Tedesco.” (DMA diss., University of Texas at Austin), 2005, vii.
27
composed some of his guitar works with his skillful mimesis of Weiss, Sor, and
Schubert. Needless to remark the superiority that places the referential homage in
the properly artistic sphere, while the mimetic homage, however cleverly conceived,
remains in a properly artisanal area, that is, by trade: not for nothing many
composition teachers assign the imitation of the various authors of the past as school
homework. 32
prompt in composing an homage in the form of a piece that depicts some elements of
Boccherini´s style, while at the same time maintaining his own compositional style. In this
that, without necessarily imitating Boccherini´s music, suggest elements usually present in
Musicologists Christian Speck and Stanley Sadie have made the following
strategies:
32
Angelo Gilardino, “Osservazioni sulla Sonata op. 77 Omaggio a Boccherini di Mario Castelnuovo-
Tedesco,” 1.
28
Musicologists James Hepokosky and Warren Darcy label this type of sonata form as
Type 1 sonatas are those that contain only an exposition and a recapitulation, with
no link or only a minimal link between them. These have been referred to as
“sonatas without development” (or instances of exposition-recapitulation form,
“slow- movement sonata form” or the “sonatina”). Type 1s normally lack internal
repeats. Fast tempo examples of the Type 1 sonata include Mozart´s overture to The
Marriage of Figaro and most of Rossini´s overtures. 34
The use of Boccherini’s model of sonata form in the Omaggio a Boccherini has
been addressed by the Italian guitar scholar and composer Angelo Gilardino in his article,
33
Christian Speck and Stanley Sadie, "Luigi Boccherini", Grove Music Online, Oxford Music
Online, 2001,
http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com.ezproxy1.library.arizona.edu/subscriber/article/grove/music/03337.
34
James Hepokosky, and Warren Darcy. Elements of Sonata Theory. Norms, Types, and
deformations of the Late-Eighteenth-Century Sonata (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006), 344.
35
Gilardino, 13.
29
Elaborating on the previous points, in the first movement of the Sonata, the
influences and procedures of Boccherini´s style are clearly evident: the treatment of the
thematic material is similar to that of a typical monothematic sonata, in which the first and
the second themes are more clearly defined by their tonal levels than by their thematic
content. Moreover, the themes seem to be presented and quickly varied or developed, and
since there are no strong cadences, it is often difficult to define clear sections. The central
development section is short and does not wander too far away harmonically.
Boccherini stylistic influences are also found in the 3rd movement, where Tedesco
recreates the "ceremonious" spirit of the eighteenth-century minuets, where a hint of the
famous Minuet from the Quintet No. 11 can be perceived. Also, as a way of suggesting the
Andalusian influence in Boccherini´s music, the use of the Phrygian cadence (typical in
Spanish folk music) can be found in passages of the 1st and the 4th movement. Finally,
another reference to Spanish music can be also found in the 2nd movement. We cannot
forget that this Spanish element may be also hinting at Andrés Segovia, the dedicatee of
this Sonata.
36
Gilardino, 23-24.
30
Although not intending to provide an extremely thorough analysis, the next division
of this paper will discuss a few points regarding structure and general thematic, harmonic-
melodic content.
Analysis
presents thematic groups that are developed and articulated, often immediately afterward.
Elaborating on this statement, in the first movement of Sonata Op. 77 Tedesco chooses to
emulate Boccherini´s procedures regarding sonata-form, and deals with themes and overall
structure conforming to a pattern that was more common of the eighteenth-century sonata-
Tedesco´s design comprises two main parts (exposition and recapitulation), and a rather
short central section that does not wander too far away from the main keys. Similarly to
Boccherini´s music, Tedesco´s strategy consists of presenting themes and their subsequent
developments and derivations thereafter, instead of presenting unique and contrasting A-B
type of material. This way of dealing with thematic material often results in a continuing
motion in which there are not strong cadence points and therefore, it is not always clear
The 1st movement begins with an exposition that encompasses a primary theme
area consisting of three themes, and their subsequent derivations. The first theme (a)
31
comprises measures 1-13, where a bold theme appears stating the D major tonic key
(primary theme). This theme begins with an anacrusis that affirms the tonic of D in the first
four bars, interspersed with a series of major triads in chromatic descending motion, that
lead towards a new motif (deciso) that presents a major 6th interval. This major 6th motif
new material, the melodic major 6th interval with the same notes (F-D) in the upper voice
Musical Example 10. Sonata op. 77, 1st movement, mm. 14-21.
32
A third theme (c) can be identified in measures 22-29. Also, another theme
derives (upper bass line, mm. 22-25, and upper voice, mm. 26-29), and will be used as
Musical Example 11. Sonata op. 77, 1st movement, mm. 22-29.
Following this passage, a small transitional chromatic bridge follows until a fermata
sign, which serves as a rhetorical pause that precedes and announces the beginning of the
secondary theme area. The anacrusis at the beginning signals that this theme is a derivation
Musical Example 12. Sonata op. 77, 1st movement, mm. 30-42.
33
The secondary theme is presented in the key of the dominant (A major). In this case,
it is the tonal level that defines the category of a secondary theme, rather than the thematic
Musical Example 13. Sonata op. 77, 1st movement: mm. 38-46.37
A derivation of the third theme (c, mm. 22-29) appears in measure 51 in the upper
voice.
Musical Example 14. Sonata op. 77, 1st movement, mm. 51-62.
37
Gilardino, 18.
34
Upon analysis of this thematic material, it is evident that this theme is a derivation
of c, since the melodic contour and rhythmic figuration is quite similar. Although they are
not literally the same, it appears clearly as a derivation of the same material. At this point it
seems clear that Tedesco is using the unique approach to sonata form that was typical in
Boccherini´s music.
Musical Example 15. Sonata op. 77, 1st movement, mm. 22-29. 38
influences, Tedesco uses the typical Phrygian cadence in some passages of the 1st
movement. For instance, measures 102-103 contain a Phrygian cadence. In this case, there
is a harmonic sequence that involves G minor-F major-E flat-D major. The F major and E
flat major chords of this sequence have been deleted in Segovia´s edition but can be seen in
38
Gilardino, 16.
35
Musical Example 16. Sonata op. 77, 1st movement, mm. 102-103. Segovia´s edition and
Facsimile score.
A possible outline of the First part of this movement can be defined this way:
Theme a b c + a´ c´
Area Primary Secondary
theme area theme area
A harmonic shift from A major to C sharp minor, along with a double bar marking
at the end of measure 62, allows us to define where a possible central part (development)
begins. Even if one were to argue that this section constitutes a proper development section,
Furthermore, the harmonic shift does not wonder away too far from the main keys.
Confirming with the aforementioned article by Speck and Sadie, “there is little thematic
development in the Viennese Classical sense,” and like Boccherini, Tedesco also “repeats
At this point, the composer elaborates over themes c´and a´, and although it may
seem like a proper development section, the length and the harmonic plan manner in which
this part appears seem to indicate otherwise. This feature is close to the schematic of Type
that initially, Tedesco had named this work “Sonatina”, to which Andrés Segovia rebelled
against.
Musical Example 17. Sonata op. 77, 1st movement, mm. 59-66.
A common procedure in Tedesco´s music is the use of double bars and fermatas to
divide small or large sections. In bar 122, the composer writes a fermata to separate the
central part from the recapitulation section. Although these double bars do not appear in the
Segovia edition, these indications appear in the manuscript score, and thus it is possible to
Musical Example 18. Sonata op. 77, 1st movement, mm. 111-122.
39
James Hepokosky and Warren Darcy, Elements of Sonata Theory, 344.
37
During the central part, Castelnuovo-Tedesco explores the two thematic materials
within the secondary theme area in different keys, culminating with a sequence of parallel
chords in chromatic movement (mm. 111-122), which serves as a retransition to what could
be considered a recapitulation.
Although it may (or not) be considered a proper development section, a central part
B. Central part
c´ c´ a c´
Following the previous central part, Tedesco presents all the themes and derivations
according to the same order of the exposition section. The recapitulation of the first theme
is extended and developed from the second motif of that same theme, which is in fact one
of the characteristics of Boccherini's sonata form. The characteristic major 6th interval is
Musical Example 19. Sonata op. 77, 1st movement, mm. 127-138.
Also, theme a ´at the recapitulation appears in the tonic key of D major, in
accordance with the normal harmonic procedures within the sonata form.
Musical Example 20: Sonata op. 77, 1st movement, mm. 164-170.
The last measures of the first movement consist of a short sequence of parallel
chords with a D in the bass as a pedal, in which the composer presents the “head” of the 1st
theme (main theme) for the last time, fragmented and repeated consecutively, as a short
coda.
39
Musical Example 21. Sonata op. 77, 1st movement, mm. 206-218.
Recapitulation
a b c + a c
Theme Primary Secondary Coda
theme theme
In conclusion, the first movement seems ambiguous at a first glance. The way
Tedesco uses thematic material does not facilitate a quick analysis. In spite of some
elements that allow us to define a structure of the movement, the presentation and
treatment of sonata-form. The lack of strong cadence points and contrasting themes do not
allow to identify sections easily. The design used by the composer, however, conforms to
40
section with two themes in tonic and dominant; an equally long recapitulation with all
themes in the tonic key, and a not so lengthy central part in which the composer cycles
Siciliana dance from the Baroque period. It is written in the key of G minor, and the
indication quasi canzone is evoking an aria with a simple melody in the upper voice using a
dotted rhythm in 6/8 meter. The Siciliana form is often used by Tedesco in works such as
the Sonatina for flute and guitar op. 205, and in the Sonatina canonica for two guitars, op.
196.
Musical Example 22. Sonata op. 77, 2nd movement, mm. 1-4.
Musical Example 23. Sonatina for flute and guitar op. 205, 2nd movement mm. 1-4.
41
Besides the delicate use of imitative polyphony, a noteworthy feature of these types
of movements is the use of refined melodies that are almost always confined to the
upper voice, in which the composer displays his sensitivity. Also, the use of scordatura
(6th string to D and 5th string to G), takes advantage of open string basses to provide
This movement is structured in a standard ABA scheme and it is built with three
themes which are developed in different keys and meters. A formal scheme could be
defined as follows:
Themes a b c a b a c
Sections A B A
The main theme (a) is presented form bar 1 to 7. The simple melodic contour, along
with the use of the minor key and characteristic dotted rhythm unmistakably suggests a
Siciliana dance. The presentation of the melody is followed by a reiteration in the middle
voice on the 2nd measure. This theme concludes with a D major chord on bar 7.
42
Musical Example 24. Sonata op. 77, 2nd movement, mm. 1-7.
short pentatonic melody that, instead of maintaining the initial dotted rhythm, is made of
sudden change of dynamics from mf to p are part of this new material. This second theme is
Musical Example 25. Sonata op. 77, 2nd movement, mm. 7-12.
43
Subsequently, a third theme (c) appears in measure 17, as a restatement of the first
theme, again with the dotted rhythm in the upper voice, only an octave higher. The staccato
markings suggest the pizzicatti accompaniments that are common in Boccherini´s music for
strings.
Musical Example 26. Sonata op. 77, 2nd movement, mm. 17-22.
In measure 51, Tedesco presents the 2nd theme (b), but now with a different tempo
indication (m. 55) - Allegretto malinconico (a characteristic tempo and character indication
in works by Boccherini). In this passage, the main melodic motif of the “1st Spanish
40
Manuel de Falla was the leading Spanish composer at that time, and “Danza No. 1” of La Vida
Breve (1904-1905) was well known and performed in various versions and arrangements. A noteworthy
version and performance was made by violinist by Fritz Kreisler in 1926 and, a connection to guitar
performance of this famous work can be found in the brilliant arrangement for two guitars by Catalan
guitarist-composer Emilio Pujol (1957).
44
Musical Example 28. Sonata op. 77, 2nd movement, mm. 7-15.
45
This second theme is afterward presented with different tempo and character
indication on measures 55-60, where a sort of dialogue appears between the upper voice
and the bass line. This time, the quote of Falla´s theme is more evident because it appears at
a faster tempo.
Musical Example 29. Sonata op. 77, 2nd movement, mm. 55-60.
Finally, the composer recapitulates the initial theme on measure 65 in the key of G
major (parallel major), which quickly reverts to the original minor key. While not
completely presenting theme A as in the first section of this movement, but rather using
fragmentations of the theme, this 2nd movement is concluded with a brief 3rd thematic
material (C) that leads to the final cadence in the key of D major.
Musical Example 30: Sonata op. 77, 2nd movement, mm. 79-82.
46
The minuet was a court dance that was widely used for instrumental music by European
composers during the Baroque period, and it was in fact one of the few dance forms still in
fashion until the late eighteenth-century and early nineteenth-century. Luigi Boccherini
regularly used this dance form in many of his instrumental works, particularly his music for
string quartet and string quintet, some of which have become representative of the classical
Sonata op. 77, emulating the character of those by Boccherini. The minuet of Sonata op. 77
reminisces on the famous minuet from the Quintet No. 11 for strings in A Major by Luigi
Boccherini (1743-1805).
Musical Example 31. Minuet from String Quintet in E, op. 11, no. 5 for strings by L.
Boccherini.
47
preference for anacrusis beginnings, and the use of clearly outlined melody as a main
with an anacrusis of four sixteenth notes that precedes the beginning of a well-defined
melody in the upper voice, which violas, cellos and double basses accompany with
pizzicatti. These accompaniment patterns are generally based on simple rhythms and play
the role of replacing for the baroque continuo bass that would accompany the main voices.
begins with an anacrusis prior to the melody in the upper voice, while basses and middle
voices are accompanying. The staccato markings on the bass notes also seem to emulate the
Musical Example 32. Sonata op. 77, 3rd movement, mm. 1-3.
The standard Tempo di Minuetto generally used in the classical period has a tripartite
Double
48
Conventionally, the musical form of the Minuet with Trio (and Double) uses plenty
of repetitions, partly because composers want to familiarize the listener with the themes as
quickly as possible. However, Tedesco does not obey the traditional Minuet and Trio
repetition scheme, not going for the use of standard repetition bars, which allows either
The way Tedesco achieves this is by first presenting the theme A, not with a repeat
bar, but through a full reproduction, initially equal and later developed.
Musical Example 33. Sonata op. 77, 3rd movement, mm. 1-16.
Also, he writes a repetition of theme C in the Trio, and like the previous example,
first fully presenting, and then, by harmonizing the same thematic material in a different
way, he colors the latter part of the theme in the second statement. Thereafter, he decides to
repeat the D theme in the Double, again, not through a double repetition bar, but through a
49
reiteration of what has already been presented, reproducing the same motif an octave down,
initially identical and then developed, as already done in the Minuet section.
Musical Example 34. Sonata op. 77, 3rd movement, mm. 56-65.
This minuet begins in the key of G minor, and subsequently Tedesco leads the Trio
(measure 40) and Double sections (measure 56) to the parallel key of G major, and then
returning to the initial key of G minor in the whole recapitulation of the Minuet section.
This harmonic plan establishes a clear distinction of the three main sections. Finally, after
these considerations, the scheme used by Tedesco varies somewhat when compared to the
‖: A :‖ ‖B A‖ ‖: C :‖ ‖: D ‖ [: A :]
Sonata Omaggio a Boccherini´s fourth movement is a bright and energetic piece written
in the tonic key of D major. As a means of paying tribute to the Spanish (Andalusian)
influences in Boccherini’s music, Tedesco uses elements that are typical of folk Spanish
The Presto furioso is structured as a Simple Rondo, where a refrain and contrasting
episodes can be clearly identified even though developed or varied to some degree every
time they are repeated. A general harmonic and melodic overview can help to differentiate
Theme A B A C A B A C
Refrain Episode 1 Refrain Episode Refrain Episode Refrain Episode
2 1 2
Key DM AM DM Gm DM DM DM DM
41
Luigi Boccherini lived in Spain where he worked as a musician in the court of the Infant Luis
Antonio de Borbón and later for the Marquis of Benavente, who was a lover of the guitar. While in Spain, he
absorbed the influences of Spanish folk music, some of which are evident in some of his string quintets with
guitar, such as his Quintet No. 4, G 448 in D, with its famous Fandango.
51
sixths. As noted above, the sixth is largely employed in the first movement as a thematic
element. This melody is afterwards presented in the bass line alternating with a pedal in D.
The colorful B flat in arpeggios and melody reminisces the typical Phrygian cadence which
is common in folk Spanish music. 42 The Phrygian cadence represents a Spanish musical
idiom associated with the Andalusian style, which eventually became emblematic to the
aesthetics of Spanish nationalism, and has been used by several romantic and nationalist
Musical Example 35. Sonata op. 77, 4th movement, mm. 1-12.
42
In the Phrygian cadence, the root of the final chord is approached from a semitone above. In this
case, the B flat note is one semi-tone above the 5th note of the root chord (A).
52
After a short intermediate section with a pedal note of D in measures 13-20, the refrain
appears again in measure 21. This repetition is varied somewhat, and it is completed
forte.
Musical Example 36. Sonata op. 77, 4th movement, mm. 21-31.
The refrain appears further ahead in this movement with a few modifications. The
second appearance is substantially shorter (only 8 measures), with only the arpeggios and
melody in sixths. The third reappearance of A towards the end of the movement presents
the melodic motif in descending thirds, with also descending dynamic markings that go
concludes with a forte marking on measure 209, which will lead towards a vigorous march,
Section B (or Episode 1) is in the key of A, and it is made of a simple melody in the
Musical Example 37. Sonata op. 77, 4th movement, mm. 33-41.
Within section B a diverse motif appears with a descending and ascending arpeggio
in staccato, until reaching a third melody in the upper voice in measure 75 with pedal in C.
The same motif is repeated, but this time with a melody in thirds in the lower voice and
with a B flat ostinato with staccato markings in the treble in measure 83.
54
Musical Example 38. Sonata op. 77, 4th movement, mm. 72-90.
The thematic material of Section B (or 1st episode) is presented once more in
measure 127 with the melody in the upper voice accompanied by a descending arpeggio
with a pedal note in D. This melody moves forward into a brief transition where a repeated
single E flat in descending registers and dynamic markings is used to leap into the second
motif of this section (Measure 157), where a pedal note in the lower voice is consistent
above a sequence of thirds. Contrary to the first appearance of this motif, this time the pedal
note is always in the bass voice, and the motif is presented three times, instead of two. This
Musical Example 39. Sonata op. 77, 4th movement, mm. 157-178.
A striking theme for the 2nd episode appears in bar 107 for the first time, and it
consists of a march-like theme in G minor with the marking Alla marcia-risoluto. The
melody is made of parallel sixths with a dotted rhythm and a pedal in D, and it is written in
an ascending melodic sequence of two phrases that culminate in mm. 115 with a
fragmentation. This theme will be thereafter used in the key of D major as material for a
Musical Example 40. Sonata op. 77, 4th movement, mm. 107-117.
56
build-up section towards a brilliant conclusion of this sonata, where a four triple-forte chord
Musical Example 41. Sonata op. 77, 4th movement, mm. 222-230.
57
of chords, omission of notes, changes in the register of notes, and changes of indications for
tempi, articulations, and dynamics. In many of these cases, Segovia's revisions favor a more
simplified technical solution, and sometimes these modifications follow his style of guitar
playing.
The comparison of Segovia´s edition with the original manuscript score allows to
infer that most of the modifications seem to have focused on preserving the relevance of the
melody, especially in the upper voice. In this process, Segovia would sometimes sacrifice
either harmony or counterpoint, and thus affecting the overall sonority as written by
Tedesco, all of this by means of deleting notes and/or respelling chords to facilitate
execution. Even in sections where Segovia maintains the same harmony, re-positioning
chords, or deleting one or two notes of chords affects the sonority as originally thought by
the composer.
With very few exceptions, the chords that Tedesco wrote are technically possible.
Perhaps because Tedesco was a pianist and not a guitarist, his chord spelling is more wide
open and does not always appear as stacks of thirds, thus giving more a profound sonority
and emphasis to particular spots. In these cases, Segovia opts to respell chords in an almost
passages where these deletions simplify the performance and lend fluidity to the music. The
same idea applies to passages where there is deletion of counterpoint, in which Segovia
This comparison of sources will address those passages which, in my opinion, stand
out and need to be addressed due to their importance within the context of the piece.
Segovia also made several minor changes: these will not appear in my comparison as I
In the first movement, Allegro con spirito, Segovia begins with respelling the
chords in measures 8-12, placing the bass an octave lower, and changing the bass line
movement as written by Tedesco, in favor of a lower A note as a pedal with the harmonic
This kind of editorial decision facilitates the passage from a technical standpoint
since it spreads the chords easily on the guitar while using the repeated A bass note as
and 21. Segovia deletes most of the notes of the bass line in both measures, and opts for
preserving the upper voice only and supporting the downbeats with either a single bass note
or a chord. The deletion of notes to favor the upper melody is evident since Tedesco's
composition at this point is technically possible. Dynamics and articulation markings also
differ.
A similar case of deletion of notes by Segovia occurs in measures 145 and 146,
execution. For example, in measures 31 and 33 Segovia respells the chords, deciding to
keep the notes of the chords (except the bass note) as close as possible to each other.
technically possible, also produces a more profound sonority because the notes are spread
In measures 39- 40 Segovia opts for triad-like chords, avoiding the awkwardness of
performing chords on disjunctive strings. Also, he leaves out the chord on the first beat of
measure 41, which includes a dissonance between a D natural and a D sharp. This chord
In measures 40-41, the chord spelling changes appear to facilitate the overall
execution of the passage. In this case, Segovia decides to spell the chord D#-A-C-F#, and to
also anticipate the E major 7th chord one beat earlier so that the execution of the melody
will be easier without the same chord on the first beat of measure 41. Even though
Segovia´s solution is technically easier, the aural effect and overall result is different to
Tedesco´s writing.
In measure 45 Segovia simplifies the 2nd beat by deleting a C sharp that completes
Tedesco´s articulation markings use a phrasing slur, instead of a technical slur in Segovia´s
edition. This implies the use of 2 technical slurs (instead of 1) to achieve the effect as
63
originally conceived by the composer. Segovia deletes the staccato markings on the 2nd
The manuscript score shows a different design for articulations that include staccato
markings on the 2nd beats. In addition, the slurs that appear are encompassing all the notes
Another discrepancy appears in measure 53, where Tedesco has written the notes F
natural and D on the downbeat, while Segovia changes to F sharp and deletes the D note,
One of the noteworthy alterations to the manuscript score that Segovia made can be
found in measures 88-89, where a chord respelling and displacement is used as an easier
technical alternative to the original chord and rhythmic design as written by Tedesco.
Segovia writes the C# an octave higher, while Tedesco an octave lower. Again, while the
The chord on the 2nd beat is anticipated by Segovia with an added C#, while
Tedesco writes this chord on the 1st beat of measure 89, producing a quite different effect
due to the dissonance produced by an E natural and E flat on the same beat.
The following measures (90-92) also show changes in the register of the chords
written on the 2nd beat of each measure. Segovia writes the bass note an octave higher,
while Tedesco an octave lower, which produces a more profound sonority. Also, the notes
in the upper voice differ in articulation markings, as Segovia deletes the staccato written by
Tedesco.
Another discrepancy can be found on the downbeat of the 2nd measure, where
Segovia simplifies to only two notes (F and B flat), while Tedesco writes a four note chord
(Bb6/4). While Segovia´s solution is technically easier, Tedesco´s can be played as written.
measures 46-49, where we can find a different articulation design from the original
manuscript. Tedesco writes staccato markings and a phrasing slur that included the first 3
.
67
In measure 98 Segovia deletes three chords in favor of the melody line in the upper
voice. In this case Segovia deletes a sequence of chords from a passage that is technically
Measures 99-101 show the same kind of editorial modifications made by Segovia as
Segovia modifies the chords that appear in measures 156-158, re-voicing these in a
triad-like manner to simplify the execution, while Tedesco writes a chord in wide position.
Even though the harmony is not altered, the resulting harmony is affected.
A case of note omission appears in measure 166. To simplify the passage Segovia
deletes the G note in the upper voice. Although seemingly a minor modification, this note
The second beat of measure 170 shows a minor change in the bass note, as well as a
deletion of note. Segovia changes the bass line an octave lower and deletes the F note in the
middle voice, while Tedesco writes the bass note an octave lower. The deletion of the F
Segovia deletes two chords in measure 175, leaving only the upper voice. He also
changes the staccato and adds notes to the last chord in the measure.
This passage can be particularly difficult to execute, although it is possible from a technical
standpoint.
71
perform according to Tedesco´s original score, since there are a few passages that have
been written in a way that is technically impossible to play on the guitar. Although Segovia
has successfully solved these passages to his own criteria and taste, there are a few points
Tedesco´s writing in measures 10-12 for instance, show a pair of octaves on G flat
and F placed right after arriving to the chord A-Eb-D. Since it is not possible to play these
octaves as written, Segovia has deleted the lower notes in favor of the upper ones.
However, he shortens the D note of the chord and interrupts the length of the upper voice in
order to allow the fingers to shift towards the G flat and F notes right next to it.
Another passage worthy of attention can be found in measures 21-22, where there
are clear changes in the articulation. Segovia deletes the staccato markings written by
Tedesco. Even though these may be considered as minor modifications, the result on
decisions made by Segovia with regard to the notes on the bass line. These differences can
be seen in the second half of measure 31, where Tedesco´s manuscript shows an F note an
octave lower in the bass line, after a C-Gb-Eb chord. The sources show a different sequence
of notes in the bass line. My proposition is to play the F note that begins the bass line with a
finger of the right hand tapping that note on the 6th string, while holding the chord, and to
play the rest of the notes as written, including the staccato markings deleted by Segovia.
In measures 33 to 34, Tedesco writes a Bb-Gb C chord with a tie on the C note in
the upper voice that goes through measure 34. Segovia´s revisions of this passage change
the length of both chord and C note in the upper voice. This passage can be solved if
instead of shortening the chord and deleting the tie in the upper voice, one plays the F note
in the bass line with the thumb finger of the left hand.
75
Segovia´s revisions of the 3rd Movement of Sonata op. 77 appear to make things
easier from a technical standpoint. Some of these revisions show deletion of notes that
Segovia may have not considered to be necessary and that would simplify the performance
When comparing the sources, the differences can be seen from the first measures.
The bass line written by Tedesco shows consistent staccato markings, while Segovia´s
edition is not always consistent in this aspect. Also, Segovia deletes notes in the bass line
76
from measure 2 to 7. The most remarkable changes appear on the 3rd beat of measures 4, 5
and 6 in which Segovia leaves out the chords written by Tedesco, preserving only one note
as bass line. Tedesco´s writing is quite clear in its harmonic aspect and is technically
possible.
A case of a repositioned chord can be seen on the 2nd and 3rd beats of measure 36,
where Segovia writes a 3-note chord to be played on neighboring strings. Tedesco´s 4-note
The passage in measures 53-55 shows differences starting on the 3rd beat of measure
53, where the sources differ in the bass line. Segovia changes Tedesco´s basses, particularly
those notes on the downbeat of each group of eight notes. Also, the chord on the downbeat
Tedesco´s manuscript score. The arrival to a D on the downbeat of the 2nd beat is grouped
on eight notes along with the rest of the notes on that measure. Tedesco´s writing is
different as the D note on the downbeat of the 2nd beat is written as a single upper voice
note that lasts two beats, while the rest of the eight notes are part of a lower voice. The
same situation occurs in the sequence that follows on measure 59, only a 3rd lower.
Segovia´s modifications of measures 64-65 consist of the deletion of some notes that
complete three note chords on the first and second beats of measure 64. These
modifications not only are unnecessary since these chords can be played as written, but also
On the downbeat of measure 70, Segovia fills out the Eb 6/4 chord to be played with
five notes, instead of a simple three-note chord written by Tedesco. This is an awkward
decision as it is not possible to hold the chord for the length originally indicated by the
composer. Tedesco also has written a piano marking, which along with the discrete three
note chord and a rest sign on the bass line, turns out to be more appropriate for this delicate
passage.
measures 64-65. Segovia deletes notes in the middle voice that form chords on the second
beats of measures 72 and 73, and on the downbeat of measure 74. The rich harmonies
written by the composer are left out for a simplified solution that is technically easier. Also,
the bass note on the second downbeat of measure 74 has been changed from D to G.
81
Segovia changed the last measure of the 3rd movement by writing a G minor chord
in the upper register, while Tedesco´s writing shows a single G note on the bass line with a
staccato marking. Segovia´s decision seems to try to give a more conclusive character to
the ending, while Tedesco´s intention appears to be more elegant and delicate. This type of
Although Segovia did not drastically alter the harmonic structure of the overall
work, his editorial revisions often affect the sonority intended by Tedesco. In the fourth
movement, there are several differences, starting with the tempo/character marking of the
movement. Tedesco's label appears as Presto furioso, while Segovia modifies this
indication to Vivo ed energico. The sequence of notes in the opening arpeggios is different.
While Segovia’s revision of this passage may sound similar, Tedesco’s writing of this
arpeggio creates a more profound effect because of the richer sonorities of the lower range.
Regarding the arpeggios in this movement, Segovia generally changes them for arpeggios
generated from chords which can be executed on neighboring strings, mostly in stacks of
The change of the D note that alternates with the E flat and G to an octave lower
Another example of differences between the two sources occurs in measures 30-31
at the end of the first section. Tedesco’s writing shows a passage that is playable as written,
while Segovia´s revision opts for a change in the sequence of notes and a harmonic note on
Starting on the last sixteenth note of beat one in measure 30, Segovia changes
Tedesco’s G#-D-F-B-D to D-F-G#-B-D, which not only changes the melodic structure of
measure 37, followed by a modification in measure 38 that preserves only the upper voice
and deletes the rest of the notes that actually form an arpeggio.
85
chord in stacks of thirds to be played on strings 1, 2, and 3. Tedesco´s writing on the other
86
hand, requires an arpeggio to be played on separate strings, which requires more technical
The passage in measures 91-98 shows differences in the arpeggios (M. 93-94, and
97-98). The chord on the second-beat of these measures differs, affecting the harmony.
Measures 119-121 are quite different. Segovia decides to preserve only the upper
voice, thus deleting the middle voice and the basses. In addition, he changes the rhythm to
eighth notes, instead of the dotted rhythm written by Tedesco, and lastly, he includes a
different articulation marking by adding a pizzicato indication over the notes on the upper
voice.
chords that would generate arpeggios that can be played on neighbor strings, even though
some of the notes are changed. This is a clever revision by Segovia, since this is one of the
passages that would need careful attention and a skillful performer to achieve a successful
without changing the harmony, places the three upper notes to be played on neighbor
181-183, where Segovia decides to simplify by deleting the lower notes to favor the
melodic line in the upper voice. The sequence of intervals written by Tedesco is more clear
in its harmony (B major). Also, Segovia adds a pizzicato indication, while Tedesco writes
this sequence with staccato markings. The dynamic markings also differ.
In measure 209 the sources differ somewhat since Segovia adds a six string chord to
fill in the D major harmony and enhance the sonority of the ascending sequence. Tedesco´s
writing shows an ascending sequence with a crescendo marking, minus a chord at the end.
Segovia deletes the double basses written by Tedesco in measures 219-221. The
aural effect differs as the composer´s intention seems to add support to the dotted rhythm in
CONCLUSION
Sonata op. 77 Omaggio a Boccherini is one of the major guitar sonatas composed
during the first half of the twentieth century. With the help of Andrés Segovia, it has
become one of the main works within the standard guitar repertoire. It is necessary to
recognize that without the immense talent and drive of a figure of the magnitude of
Segovia, many of the guitar works that are known and widely played until now would not
have been composed, published or performed, and ultimately would not have become part
The analysis in this study intends to aid the performer by illustrating the structural
and stylistic components of this work needed to cohesively perform this music. The insight
relationship at the time this Sonata was composed allows us to explore the creative process
and eventual outcome pertaining this important guitar work. The assessment of Andrés
Segovia´s editing practices illustrate on his criteria and approach to the music that was
expressly written for him. These two aspects are essential in our understanding of Segovia´s
were made at a time when he was considered the most authoritative voice when committing
to the significant task of publishing, performing, and eventually recording this music.
musical works has become a compelling task for scholars and performers to attain a better-
informed interpretation of the music. Some of those seemingly long-lost documents are still
being discovered as it is the case of Sonata op. 77, on which this study is focused. An
assessment and comparison therefore becomes necessary tasks for the performer. At the
93
time Sonata op. 77 was composed, Castelnuovo-Tedesco was still in the process of tackling
the intricacies of writing for such an unusual instrument such as the guitar. Even though
Tedesco had been proving himself proficient in guitar writing, there were still certain issues
that would arise, in which Segovia would have to make decisions, and often in these
decisions his personal taste and own criteria would determine a different result than
intended by the composer. Although Segovia´s revisions seem reasonable from a technical
technically possible, but also richer and more interesting in its final aural outcome.
It is my hope that this study will be good of service for teachers, students,
performers and aficionados to further their knowledge of this important work for guitar.
94
APPENDIX
Solo guitar:
o Tonadilla sur le nom de Andrés Segovia pour guitare seul, op. 170 no. 5 (1954)
o Escarramán, A Suite of Spanish Dances from the XVI Century (after Cervantes), op.
177 (1955)
o Platero y Yo, op. 190 for guitar and narrator, text by Juan Ramón Jiménez (1960)
• Preludio in forma di habanera sul nome di Bruno Tonazzi, op. 170/7 (1954)
• Tanka (Japanese Song) on the name of Isao Takahashi, op. 170/10 (1955)
Two guitars:
o Les Guitares bien tempérées, op. 199 (24 preludes and fugues in all 24 major and
Chamber:
o Aria for oboe, cello and guitar, op. 146c, No. 3 (1950)
o Eclogues, for flute, English horn & guitar, op. 208 (1965)
o Vogelweide: ein Lieder-Cyklus für Bariton und Gitarre (oder Klavier), op. 186
(1959)
o The Divan of Moses-Ibn-Ezra (1055-1135): a cycle of songs for voice and guitar,
Concertante:
o Capriccio Diabolico Omaggio a Paganini (Guitar and orchestra), op. 85a (1945)
o Concerto Sereno (Secondo concerto in Do) per chitarra e orchestra, op. 160 (1953)
Transcriptions:
o Sonata I for Guitar and Harpsichord. Realization of the figured bass of a work by
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alcázar, Miguel. The Segovia-Ponce Letters. Columbus, OH: Editions Orphèe, 1989.
——. Obra completa para guitarra de Manuel M. Ponce de acuerdo a los manuscritos
originales. Mexico: Conaculta, 2000.
Asbury, David S. “20th Century Romantic Serialism: The Opus 170 Greeting Cards of
Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco.” DMA diss., University of Texas at Austin, 2005.
Bobri, Vladimir. The Segovia Technique. New York: Bold Strummer Ltd, 1990.
——. Sonata “Omaggio a Boccherini,” op.77. Edited by Andrés Segovia. Mainz: Schott,
1935.
——. Una vita di musica (un Libro di Ricordi). Florence: Cadmo, 2005.
Cearley, Gilka Wara Céspedes de. “Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco: Three Decades of Music
for the Guitar.” MM Thesis, University of Texas at Austin, 1973.
Speck, Christian and Sadie, Stanley. “Boccherini, Luigi.” Grove Music Online. Oxford
Music Online; Accessed November 3, 2011.
http://www.oxfordmusiconline.com.ezproxy1.library.arizona.edu/subscriber/article/gro
ve/music/03337.
Gray A., Stephen. “The Solo Guitar Music of Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco: A Survey.”
MM Thesis, San Jose State University, 1978.
Hepokowsky, James, and Warren Darcy. Elements of Sonata Theory. Norms, Types, and
Deformations of the Late-Eighteenth-Century Sonata. New York: Oxford University
Press, 2020.
Kraft, Norbert, guitarist. Romantic Works for Guitar “Guitar Recital,” by Mario
Castelnuovo-Tedesco. Chandos CHAN9033. CD. 2006.
——. “Mario Castelnuovo Tedesco: Una vita di musica. Nuovi approfondamenti biografici
e storia di Morning in Iowa, op. 158.” Il Fronimo no. 138 (April 2007): 13-22.
Otero, Corazon. Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco. His Life and Works for the Guitar. UK:
Ashley Mark Publishing Co., 1999.
Perricone, Elosia, and Adriano Sebastiani. Segovia e il suo repertorio. Genova: Graphos,
2002.
Ponce, Manuel M. Thème Varié et Finale, Ed. Andrés Segovia. Mainz: Schott, 1928.
——. Guitar Works. Edited from the Sources by Tilman Hoppstock. Mainz: Schott, 2006.
100
Ponsillo, Cinzia, and Adriano Sebastiani. Musica: espressione di vita. Pensiero estetico di
Mario Castelnuovo- Tedesco, analisi e catalogo delle opere per chitarra, carteggio.
Latina: Pair, 1996.
Postlewate, Charles. (1981). Andres Segovia: A Living Legend. American String Teacher,
31(1), 28–32. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/000313138103100113.
Purcell, Ron. Andrés Segovia: Contributions to the World of Guitar. Northridge, CA:
Oviatt Library, California State University, 1978.
Segal, Peter. “The Role of Andrés Segovia in Re-Shaping the Repertoire of the Classical
Guitar.” D.M.A. diss., Temple University, 1994.
Segovia, Andrés, guitarist. Segovia - The HMV Recordings 1927-39. Vol. 2, by Mario
Castelnuovo-Tedesco. EMI. CD. 2003.
——. The Art of Andrés Segovia. Vol. 5, by Mario Castelnuovo-Tedesco. Dynamic IDIS
Historical. CD. 2011.
Tampalini, Giulio, guitarist. The Complete Works for Solo Guitar, by Mario Castelnuovo-
Tedesco. Suonare Records SNR 002. CD. 2006.
Wade, Graham & G. Garno. A New Look at Segovia, his Life, his Music. Pacific, MO: Mel
Bay Publications, 1997.
Wade, Graham. “Segovia, Andrés.” Grove Music Online. 2001; Accessed 29 Feb. 2020.
https://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic/view/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.0
01.0001/omo-9781561592630-e-0000025329.
——. A Concise History of the Classic Guitar. Pacific, MO: Mel Bay Publications, 2001.