Rondo a Capriccio Harmonic Analysis

So, I have finished analyzing Rondo a Capriccio. I found most of it simple to analyze. Those sequences that I got stuck on, I got stuck on because of the accented non-chord tones that Beethoven uses. But other than that, I found the analysis to be pretty simple to do. A lot of secondary dominants are used here. A lot of these are functional(so like the secondary tonic shows up right after the secondary dominant most of the time) but some are non-functional, only there as part of a sequence. Measure 57 is where a bit of ambiguity starts. I decided to analyze it in Bb until it made no more sense in Bb(which would be at measure 68) and then notate it as a pivot to Gm.

Here is my reasoning behind analysing bars 57-68 in Bb instead of Gm:

Quote

Yes, you would expect to hear Bb major chords in a G minor piece. But in a G minor piece, if there is a resolution to III, that typically is a modulation to Bb and thus is truly a resolution to I, not III. VI and VII on the other hand can be resolved to without a sense of modulation in a minor key, just like how in a major key, you can resolve to vi without actually modulating to vi. So it just makes more sense to me for bars 57-68 to be in Bb, regardless of whether that means there is a modulation later on or not. And besides, Rondo a Capriccio has frequent modulations anyway.

Also, typically, in a minor key, III does not get inverted whatsoever. It usually is in root position. Here, if the whole passage is analyzed as being in Gm, you get all 3 inversions. There are only 2 chords(3 if you extend it to seventh chords) that typically get all the inversions. Those being I and V in major and i and V in minor(and also vii°7 if you extend it to seventh chords). Other chords like IV or vi typically only get 2 of the 3 inversions and a few others like III typically aren't inverted at all. So to see all 3 inversions of what is supposedly III in Gm makes me doubt that it is in Gm at all and instead think that it is in Bb.

The short tonicizations I didn't bother notating as key changes and instead I decided to notate them as secondary dominants in the previous key. That is, except for some at the end where I'm not sure if it is a tonicization or a modulation, so I notated it as a modulation as a precautionary measure. A lot of the ending measures are simply I V I alternations with a lot of non-chord tones. Another frequent secondary chord I found is secondary diminished sevenths, usually vii°7/V leading either to V or to vii°7, which then leads to I or V depending on the previous chord. I saw a couple of augmented sixth chords, both German augmented sixths. The first one resolves to the dominant and is then respelt as a dominant seventh chord. The second one leads directly to a new tonic by keeping one of its notes as a common tone and resolving the other 3.

So here is my analysis of Rondo a Capriccio and an MP3 so that you can listen to the piece. Do you think my analysis is accurate? Anything you would change about it?

I didn't take a look at it too close (the use of B-flat seems mostly fine, but the fact you have to mid-modulate is less than ideal). I mostly disagree with a lot of stuff starting at 107. Even though the chords might be ever-changing in the way you notate them, I highly doubt that the harmonic rhythm is actually moving that fast. Looking at it in a Schenkerian framework, there are a lot more diminutions than anything else especially in those runs (i.e. consonant skips w/filled in passing tones), each outlining one harmonic function than each of those actually meaning anything. Imagine, for example, analyzing every inversion in Alberti bass. The mid-level structure suffers the more you deviate from the implied prolongation. 

5 hours ago, Monarcheon said:

I didn't take a look at it too close (the use of B-flat seems mostly fine, but the fact you have to mid-modulate is less than ideal). I mostly disagree with a lot of stuff starting at 107. Even though the chords might be ever-changing in the way you notate them, I highly doubt that the harmonic rhythm is actually moving that fast. Looking at it in a Schenkerian framework, there are a lot more diminutions than anything else especially in those runs (i.e. consonant skips w/filled in passing tones), each outlining one harmonic function than each of those actually meaning anything. Imagine, for example, analyzing every inversion in Alberti bass. The mid-level structure suffers the more you deviate from the implied prolongation. 

 

Well, I mean Rondo a Capriccio frequently modulates anyway, so I don't see the mid-section modulation in the area with a 2 flat key signature as much of a disadvantage.