Leaderboard

Hi, here is my new Kyrie in G minor in classic style. Vocal: sopran, alto and SATB Choir Instruments: Oboe, strings and continuo As always, I'm looking forward to your comments. Regards!

I wrote this short piece to practice counterpoint, creating some rythmic variety between parts and using some rythmic imitation. I highly appreciate your comments, and let me know if I have some forbiten parallels or weakness in the voice leading, my goal is to learn and improve 🙂 I have also a question: my baseline usually enters after the hard beat with the rythmic main motif and the resolution of the leading tone is delayed and resolved one octave downwards. I'm also not sure if this I a legant solution, because the 4th suspension between the oboe and bassoon is missing because of the silence, but on the other hand the resolution ends properly, so it's probably fine. I have tryed to put the notes missing on the hard beats and in the right octave, but it worsens drastically the flow...Can someone clarify that's is right or not? And how can it be explained? Probably my mind is just stuck with the classical pattern, where every note has to resolve in certain way and I'm just starting to open my mind... Also before the last cadence the dominant (F) should be resolved to the tonic one octave + a fourth upwards, though in the last beat the Bb is the missing one from the previous bar. Can it be analysed as a delayed resolution?

Howdy here! This is probably one of the favorite pieces that I've made recently, and I'm happy to share it with you all! Its also my first rhapsody, so if there's anything that I should know, please do tell! Attached is an audio file of the music that was made in Reaper (where i originally made the piece), and a PDF file of the score made in Musescore.

Hey everyone! This composition will be a short prelude to a suite I am writing. But I just can't figure out the right way to intoduce the short melody that begins in measure 9. Originally, I wrote a single whole note under it every measure, but I was not quite satisfied with it. My teacher also said that it's not quite effective that way, and suggested that I write arpeggiated chords (eighth notes), that start out beneath the melody, but at the end of every measure go above it. I tried that, and he thought it was a good solution, but I felt like it takes away the effect of the melody. I like to think of this short motive as a "sigh motive" kind of thing, and I feel like it needs to be introduced in a simple but effective way. I tried everything I could think of, writing a counter-melody, having chords under it, and different kinds of arpeggiated chords. But I always feel that it's either not effective enough, or that the complexity takes away from it's power. The version I am attaching is the latest version I wrote, so far this is the closest I got to what I want, but I still feel like it's not right (the melody in question starts at measure 9). How would you introduce this melody? Does anyone have suggestions? I have already written much longer and more complex pieces than this one, but I just can't get this right. Also note, that this is not the full composition, I only included it until the melody ends, because the second half is still big mess. Any help would be appreciated, and of course if someone has observations about any part of the portion I included, I am happy to hear it. Thank you, Vertes prelude.pdf

Thanks I will look at this at some point today

@DanJTitchener, @Tortualex Thanks for the advice, even though now I've set aside this project, I just needed this type of advice so when I come back woring on it I can modidify with some ideas in my head. I'll try to to take in account all the points you've mentioned. I think I'll be able to take in account almost everything because I aswell was not very satisfied with the direction It was going (That is why I posted here 😃 ) so thanks a lot for spendig some time giving some feedback!

Interesting, I have never thought of making all the movements come into a Giant sonata form. About the first movement, I have to say that, I don't fell that the themes are contrasting enought, they are very alike. I f you didn't tell me that those are suposed to be the themes of a sonata, I wouldn't figure it out. The first movement is smooth, with very little texturee. I have to agree with DanjTitchener about the ideas to make it more interesting. The second movement has the same problem, no texture at all, the other piano just completes the harmony and nothing else. Think a 2 instrument piece as a conversation, following that comparation, your movement would be like 2 people talking at the same time and saying exactly the same. I hope my comment helps you to make your sonata better, I really like the idea and I would like to hear it finished :3.

Well, the MIDI sequencer I use was just the one in Reaper, which is still a DAW. Though, I'm oldschool and usually compose first with notation. Also, all of the emulations and VSTs I know of only run in DAWs, so I'm afraid I can't recommend any good, retro-style MIDI trackers. However, if you head over to Blue Stahli's YouTube channel, I know he's done some work with MIDI trackers and has videos of which ones he's used.

Hi, I've been learning more deeply in counterpoint in the last weeks and here is my first invention. An invention is a piece where the parts are inverted with each other. It means the parts (two in this case) can work either as a top part and as a baseline. It consist of just 15 bar: 6 bars section on the Tonic. 6 bar section on the Dominant (the same material, but inverted and transposed to the dominat, that's why is called invention). 3 bars coda with a Tonic pedal. Looking to the construction of the first bars in more detail: 2 first bars are the main motif on the right hand as shown on the screen shot, so the subject, and the countersubject on the left hand. In the dominant section the subject will be on the left hand and the countersubject on the right hand, so they both motifs work good as a baseline. bars 3-4 is constructed with the same motif as bars 1-2, but with the intervals inverted. Here the harmony key and countersubject changes completely. Bars 1-2 are in Gm, but in bars 3-4 the feeling is more like Cm ending with a suspension on the dominat. Bars 5-6 are modulating episode constructed with elements of the subject and countersubject. I appreciate you feedback!

An ambitious piece. I applaud you for attempting something like this. I hope you find my feedback useful and constructive. That said, I really encourage you to listen to some pieces written for two pianos, because this piece hasn't taken advantage of the huge potential this can bring. For very large sections, the lines are being doubled on the other instrument at an octave. The texture is very 'thin' because of this, there's little interest to be had. However, note that repetitive patterns alone are not necessarily 'bad': the Moonlight sonata's famous first movement has broken arpeggios throughout, but in that piece, the interest is kept primarily with the harmonic progressions and, to a lesser extent, the melody at the top. For me, this is this piece's problem, neither the texture, harmony or melody do enough to keep my attention. For textural variety, i'd recommend removing some of that octave doubling and experiment with some counterpoint ideas. Also, it's ok to sometimes give one of the instruments some time for a solo section, or set one to have a more accompanying role. For harmonic variety, consider following the blueprint for sonata-form, this will help you create some drama.