(Fr. reprise; Ger. Wiederholung; It. replica; Lat. repetitio).
The restatement of a portion of a musical composition of any length from a single bar to a whole section, or occasionally the whole piece. Since the Classical period, repeated passages have not usually been written out; instead they are enclosed within the signs ||: and :||, although the first is generally omitted if the repeat is to be made from the beginning of a movement. Repeats commonly indicated include those made of both sections of a binary movement, that made of the first section of an ABA movement such as the minuet and trio (usually indicated by the words ‘da capo’), the refrain of a rondeau on its initial appearance, and one or both halves of a movement in sonata form. The evolution of the notation, its exact interpretation and the practice of making repeats nevertheless raise certain problems, not all of which have obvious solutions.
In medieval and Renaissance music, repeats are often required even though no specific instructions to this effect are given. In a medieval chanson the performers must generally deduce the pattern of repeats needed from the poetic form of the text. Repeats are rare in Renaissance vocal music, but when they occur in bicinia or in pieces with, for example, two soprano parts, an interchange of the equal parts is sometimes called for in the repetition; as a result an element of variation is introduced into it. This may well have been accompanied by the addition of further embellishments during the repeat, a practice which became universal during the Baroque period, when the da capo of an aria would be lavishly ornamented and repeats in dance music were often elaborately varied, as François Couperin’s numerous versions of pieces ‘plus orné’ and the doubles to some of J.S. Bach’s sarabandes and courantes show. For C.P.E. Bach the variation of repeats was mandatory, and he showed how this should be done in his Sonaten … mit veränderten Reprisen (1760). Composers resisted such decoration during the 19th century, at any rate in more serious compositions such as sonatas, and they showed any modifications that they required by a special direction (e.g. Beethoven’s direction that the minuet in his Quartet in C minor op.18 no.4 be played faster when it returns after the trio) or by completely rewriting the passage in question.
The notation of repeats was very imprecise up to the 17th century and in certain respects remained so even into the 18th century. In virginal music repeats are often implied even when no indication is given. The double bar, with or without dots, may imply repeats but may on the other hand merely be a calligraphical ornament (see Ferguson).
Georg Muffat stated in 1701 that a Grave should never be repeated but that lively movements could be repeated in their entirety two or three times if necessary. Handel actually specified this in some of the quick dances in the Water Music, and the last movement of Corelli’s Sonata op.1 no.4, which is in one continuous section, has a terminal repeat sign that suggests a similar treatment.
Although both halves of 18th-century sonata form movements are marked to be repeated, following the pattern of the binary structure from which they derived, there is evidence that such repeats were soon regarded as vestigial survivals not necessarily to be strictly observed. Grétry took exception to the automatic observation of these signs, and Hüllmandel and Guénin suppressed them altogether in certain works. By 1800, with few exceptions, the repeat of the second half was no longer indicated, and even that of the first half was sometimes not observed, though up to this date composers often continued to make provision for it. Beethoven’s requirements are not always clear, for example as to whether or not the opening Grave is to be included in the repeated section at the beginning of the Sonate pathétique op.13. But the extraordinary repeat of the second half only of the finale of the ‘Appassionata’ Sonata op.57 cannot simply be dismissed as an absurdity; and his deliberate modification of the first movement of the ‘Eroica’ Symphony to include the usual repeat of the exposition suggests intention, not convention.
Clearly the observation of repeats and the possibility of ornamentation within them are problems of importance in interpretation. The requirements of structure – tonal balance and the lengths of sections – must always be observed. In variations where ‘conventional’ repeats may blossom into written-out double variations in the course of the work, failure to observe them in the theme results in a certain distortion. The practice of making only the first repeats in each movement of Bach’s Goldberg Variations set is patently absurd. Before suppressing a composer’s written indications in a sonata form movement the performer must consider whether the proportions of the movement will suffer as a result, whether significant material from first-time bars will be discarded or interesting changes in the course of harmonic events will be lost, and whether a meaningful juxtaposition of material between the close and the opening of the exposition may be sacrificed.
In 18th-century terminology a repeat (presumably a modification of the earlier Reports) also denotes an entry of the subject in a fugue or other imitative piece.
NewmanSCE
F. Praeger: ‘On the Fallacy of the Repetition of Parts in the Classical Form’, PMA, ix (1882–3), 1–16
T. Dart: The Interpretation of Music (London, 1954, 4/1967/R)
H. Ferguson: ‘Repeats and Final Bars in the Fitzwilliam Virginal Book’, ML, xliii (1962), 345–50
N. Temperley: ‘Tempo and Repeats in the Early Nineteenth Century’, ML, xlvii (1966), 323–36
H. Macdonald: ‘To Repeat or not to Repeat’, PRMA, cxi (1984–5), 121–37
J. Dunsby: ‘The Formal Repeat’, JRMA, cxii (1987–8), 196–207
MICHAEL TILMOUTH/R