Luis Hernández

The piece sounds very nice. The two instruments are well interwoven. But I have the impression that the piano works with the bass on one side, and the right hand in a high batatne register, close to the oboe. That (by ear) makes me think that the middle register could be more exploited, but without score I don't know exactly.

I like it as it is, sometimes, when we try to lengthen the works without sense they become boring. I thought that a piece with a heterophonic organization all the time could also get tiring, but the truth is that this is not the case.

Congratulations. It is a great job and a beautiful piece of work. I liked the first part very much, with a long crescendo, well elaborated, ...., always noticeable when the brass comes in. But the second part, calmer, I found it very emotional, and for me that is a plus.

A wonderful work. It really is emotional and that is, for me, one of the most important things. The inclusion of the alto saxophone seems to me to be very successful.

An interesting and beautiful work. It sounds contemporary but totally accessible. Perhaps making it easier to listen to there would be some more commentary. It's as simple as dragging the pdf and mp3 files into the message window.

Within seconds of starting to listen to and view the score, my “analysis” mode went to off. The counterpoint is so beautiful and surely the best thing to do was to let the music come in and enjoy it. I really like this sound (flute-like a bit) on the organ. And for this piece I think it goes well. A full organ sound, I share that opinion, excessive. There is a moment, when the sequences end, around 3:36 when the timbre seems to change, which I also like. Congratulations on the piece.

I also liked it very much. I think it has quite a lot of harmonic richness and the central part, being less somber, is well connected with the rest.by the left hand pattern and some melodic gestures. The modulation is somewhat original (Cm -- B), and it is reached in a peculiar way (by voice leading or, as one would say now, following some neo-Riemannian patterns). In measure 30, the first note in the bass should already be an A#, perhaps

@PeterthePapercomPoser Hello Thank you. It makes sense what you are saying. Since an augmented 6th chord resolves well on the V, which would be F, over Bb. I think there are three points of view: Functionally, the solution you propose seems very possible to me. Structurally, it could be a Gbsus, or perhaps another nomenclature. But I think the key is that this bar runs through voice conduction, even if it cannot be clearly explained, or has more than one interpretation.

Hello It's a seemingly simple concept, with three instruments marking the harmony (and steady beat) and two in octaves with the melody. You may think that it doesn't take advantage of the potential of the sections, but from my point of view, it works quite well.

Hello A very nice sounding piece of work, and well done. Balance and plays of counterpoint and etc.... Sounds very much in the galant style.

Hello I think these little works fulfill the function you mention (being enjoyable). It's very nice the harmony in general, to me it sounds quite “idiomatic” as far as jazz is concerned. Sometimes there are some chords that are a bit of a shock to my ear. In principle I am very open to harmonies of this type but for example in bar 10 of the first piece the resulting chord is a bit strange (F-Ab-Db-F-Bb-Eb-E).... The sound of the double bass sometimes sounds a bit “dry”, but I think it's because of the virtual instrument.

I'm writing a little piece for strings and I don't know how to play a measure myself. In the end, I don't care either, I know that it comes from voice conduction, but well, let's guess what it could be... It is bar 4 (in blue). The piece is in D minor. Although it starts in G minor. So Gm - Dm - ¿¿?? F..... Since the resulting chord in that measure (after what I consider some appoggiaturas) contains Gb - Ab - Cb.... it could be called Gbsus (with its 2 = Ab and with its4 = Cb). Somehow it links to the following chord by descending semitone (F).

It sounds quite nice!

I think it is a very enjoyable, balanced and well-written piece of work. The piano sounds good and the dynamics respond quite well. I liked the Allegro very much, it's lively, always interesting (I even didn't dislike the repetition of the first part, which often bores me. In the second part, the initial part is great, a bit “Bellinian” for the length of its phrases. The following part begins more unstable and takes on darker tints, a good contrast. The part from bar 35 surprises by its march-like character, which leaves a super-mozartian melody in bar 45. The final part also has memorable sequences and a satisfying closing character. I see that the movements are written quite some time apart. Nevertheless, the work seems very coherent to me, which I always like. Although it is not my preferred style, I enjoyed listening to it very much. Thank you.

Although I believe they have an intimate relationship, the horizontal writing of the Renaissance and Baroque is different from what can be seen in Romanticism. Thanks to the conducting of voices, we see amazing progressions that work very well. This period is replete with such examples. An “extreme” case is the Wagnerian harmonies. Liszt, Consolation IV. Each chord is preceded by its dominant.