Leaderboard

Hello. My chronological journey of music brought me to Romanticism, in which I have been immersed for months. I study its methods, harmonies, etc... And that has led me to study also the neo-Riemannian theory, since many chord progressions are explained through it. I write some things practicing these concepts. This Consolation III (as there were two others already) is very much inspired by Liszt's, in its structure and some resources. I have also based it on a pop song whose harmony is fantastic. You have to absorb from all sources....

Especially taking care when writing the outer voices is sound advice, I'd say (and something I've seen a great many music theorists recommend). The outer voices are normally more audible than the inner voices, so it's particularly important to compose them gracefully, whereas the inner voices can get away with being relatively bland. There's good precedent for this approach, as well, given that Mozart, one of the most brilliant composers, is said to have started by writing the outer voices and only later filling in the middle ones.

I totally agree, and I think this applies to any kind of musical system based on tonal harmony (by thirds, fourths or whatever). In solo piano compositions it is very well observed, but in orchestra it is the same taking into account doublings and layers.

That's a really beautiful fugue. Kudos to you for composing it. Anyway, my point isn't really that cross relations, chord regressions, etc. shouldn't ever be used so much as it is that such devices undermine the smoothness of the musical texture. A similar statement could be made of introducing dissonance into a piece, but we all know dissonance has its place in music. It just has to be used in a carefully controlled fashion. The same can be said for cross relations, chord regressions, and some of the other things mentioned in this thread.

I thought that this neo-Riemannian theory was just one more theoretical brain teaser. And I love contemporary music and its mechanisms. Although this theory really describes things that happened already in romanticism and explains many progressions that have no place in a functional tonal scheme. But when I got serious about it, I discovered that it is not only a method of analysis that allows you to understand certain works or passages, but it is also a tool for composition because you can learn to connect harmonies that, in another field, seem unthinkable.

That's right, that jump on the piano sounded strange to me. In the sax quartet version it sounds very good. Actually this version is great.

I really enjoyed it very much! Specially the beginning and the part starting in 2:17 where you changed the texture for a little bit and the nice tremolo at the ending for going back to the previous texture. I am also really interested in neo-Riemannian theory and I bought a book called "audacious euphony" that is supposed to be really good for learning it, but I still could not start studying it. Your videos are always particularly helpful because you even write the chords so they can be used as learning material as well! Nice piece!

There is much wisdom in these words. The music is great as usual. Harmonic curveballs kept the static texture interesting for me. I particularly liked the dominant root in the IV chord. TIL 🙂

I think it is a very nice and beautiful piece. At first it sounded a little slow for a minuet, but that's beside the point. It has modulations that make it interesting. And the counterpoint sounds very nice. The first time you hear that jump in the melody it's a bit of a surprise, in measure 6, but then it becomes structural. What I would try to soften is the accentuated crescendo ending because it seems excessive to me, at least in this software performance.

Congrats .... Jazzy! 🙂 Very enjoyable ....... She definitely put her interpretation on the music. Mark