yrogerg

I can only say I loved listening to it. The main theme was great!

Enjoyed! I really liked your melodic writing in both movements. I thought the first movement was more 'integrated' rather than lacking in variety.

OK. I often name by character and feeling rather than trying to correspond to the metronome mark. I guess it could be considered weird but then I recall that other composers have done so. Like chopin's 1st and 4th etudes having the same metronome tempo but one marked allegro and the other presto. Number 4 does feel like an impetuous presto though, and 1 is calmer even though they have the same absolute tempo. Anyway, that's just where I was coming from. Your justification for Largo is fine.

Sounds like a love song. I enjoyed it. I suppose it doesn't 'feel' like a largo; maybe an andante, but that's the least.

Nice, enjoyed it!

For me it had an aristocratic beauty about it. Your ideas flowed very freely and they were all nice. I enjoyed it. It was pleasant like a sunny day and my ears were tickled. :)

I like the sound of it. The interplay of harmony and rhythm kind of makes it feel both happy and sad/desolate.

Hilarious! In a good way. I couldn't help but imagine a really clumsly person breaking things.

Not bad! Cheerful and a bit funny.

Yeah, you could vary the theme melodically or modulate or build on some previous idea. The section at 1:40-1:50 could recur in an extended manner for example. So you hint at in the beginning but instead of cutting it short on its return, you develop it. It is the section after the 3/8 interlude that most feels like it could use an injection of some contrast. Not necessarily that it needs a whole new theme (although that's an option) but some imbalance, interruption, change in some of the elements of music so it doesn't feel like a really long ending. The melodic ideas are pretty though. You might opt not to change it in any way but you can keep certain techniques in mind for other pieces.

I almost missed this, a quick glance at the title looked like the other thread. It's a very tender movement with a kind of tentative character. I also liked the contrapuntal interplay in the middle section. There is a little part there that felt like a faint whisper of the first movement before going its own way. Or maybe I was just being a bit too attentive.

Well, it certainly does errm "assert itself" later one huh? :D What part of daybreak is that? When someone jolts you out of your warm bed to showel snow? I did enjoy it though. It had a warm earthiness about it. It lulled me into a place of comfort then... I don't know how to feel about "that" part. I'm not going to say it shouldn't be there since the piece would probably be less without it. I guess its one of those necessary evils, like the alarm clock at daybreak. I appreciate it but hate it. Somehow I think I'm getting at what you were trying to evoke. If so, I think it worked.

It sounds nice. I probably wouldn't have thought of Beethoven's moonlight if you hadn't mentioned it. There are a few similarities in the accompaniment but they could be in any number of other pieces as well. (What I mean is that the moonlight's arpeggiation of the triad isn't unique in itself and most music will use idioms also employed in other pieces). My only criticism would be that it felt a bit static for its length. At 5 and 1/2 minutes it could flirt a little more with other keys, for example. Overall, though it has a tender melody and a pleasing somber mood. My favorite section was about 1:40-1:50 where there were hints of underlying passion that dissipated into the more playful middle section. I thought the ending was fine. It served its purpose well.

You need to try another hosting service. This one is no good.

Thanks for your responses. Yes, I don't usually like the development-recap repeat either but I can see where it can help balance the form. The exposition repeat doesn't always bother me either. Mozart sometimes throws so many themes at you (I think in his k332 sonata first movement, up to seven) that you sense little thematic growth in the exposition and you don't mind hearing it again to assimilate all the material. In your case (and in some beethoven) the developmental drama begins right away. Your whole exposition derives from two short themes and it's very well done. However, it creates such a trajectory in my mind that hearing it all again right after it finished the first time does feel like repeating a battle. It doesn't kill the movement for me, just makes it a little less than ideal. Yeah, at bar 65, the exposition ends in the high treble and the development commences in the same bar. I think the first few bars of the development takes the place of an exposition repeat in terms of creating suspense. Appasionata's exposition is long and thematically compact. In the Walstein he does repeat the first movement's exposition but that exposition is more thematically rich. Yeah, music is a personal journey and each person's style will evolve as he writes. Mozart had some interesting ideas too for the recap. He sometimes inverts the order so the themes reoccur back to front after the development. The whole form then becomes symetrical about the development. He was also fond of changing the mode in the recap, varying the melodies or interjecting new material somewhere. I absolutely agree! It's all about balance. If you go too far on the repetition axis or too far on the variety axis you might fail. In one case because it gets boring, in the other case because it's incoherent. It's the same as in speech or oratory. In my own attempts at composition, I don't care too much about pursuing unfamiliar harmonies but I'm always thinking about form. That's one's primary means of guiding the listener. Anyway, great reading your posts and keep up the awesome musical writing.