Fugax Contrapunctus

I do have to admit the general textural density remains quite staunchly homophonic-sounding for quite a good few passages, mostly in the developmental section. As with my previous motet, the main focus here was once again textual intelligibility, so in order to break that lack of variety in note values and durations across voices I would need to add in new passages or modify the existing ones by pruning the underlying counterpoint to accommodate for longer values, which at this point seems... somewhat unfeasible, to put it lightly. I could have added an Amen section at the end but after repeating the same incipit in the stretti and then following up with a Da Capo al Fine at the very end, I doubt it would have made much structural sense compared to, say, placing it right after the "Qui vivis et regnas in saecula saeculorum" phrase where it is normally expected to be ennunciated. Nevertheless, pondering your suggestions has made me realize that the underlying structure was not calculated thoroughly enough, and even if it does have a clearer sense of direction, structural integrity, Fortspinnung, etc. than most of my other compositions by my usually fairly chaotic standards, it still falls short in the end. Had you not pointed out the textural flaws I might not have considered the whole absent Amen tangent. Thank you kindly for bringing these points forth.

Just as was the case with the previous movement I composed for this Requiem in the works, "Libera me, Domine", the subject came first and I then had to find a suitable liturgical text that matched the prosodic and accentual patterns implied by its rhythm and melody. Since today's current date, October 10th, has been the World Day Against the Death Penalty for over 2 decades now, I figured it was quite a reasonable occassion to post a Requiem movement as I just finished it. The picture to the left of the thumbnail was originally taken from a sarcophagus found at the Abbey of St. Clement at Casauria, Pescara, Italy. Its text, whose incipit serves as the main feature of this composition, belongs to Psalm 143 "Absolution of the Dead". YouTube video link: Original liturgical text and translations: Latin: Non intres in judicium cum servo tuo, Domine, quia nullus apud te justificabitur homo, nisi per te omnium peccatorum ei tribuatur remissio. Non ergo eum, quaesumus, tua judicalis sententia premat, quem tibi vera supplicatio fidei christianae commendat: Sed, gratia tua illi succurente, mereatur evadere judicium ultionis, qui dum viveret, insignitus est signaculo sanctae Trinitatis: Qui vivis et regnas in saecula saeculorum. English (20th-century missal translations): Enter not into judgment with Thy servant, O Lord; for, unless Thou grant him forgiveness of all his sins, no man shall be justified in Thy sight. Wherefore, may he not suffer, we beseech Thee, the sentence Thou pronouncest in judgment upon one whom the faithful prayer of Christian people commendeth to Thee, to be a doom which shall crush him utterly. Rather, succour him with Thy grace, that he may be found worthy to escape the vengeance of that judgment, who, while he lived, was signed with the seal of the Holy Trinity. Thou who livest and reignest, world without end. English (Modern Standard Vernacular): Enter not into judgment with Your servant, O Lord, for in Your sight no man shall be justified, unless through You the remission of all his sins be granted unto him. Therefore, we beseech You, let not the sentence of Your judgment weigh heavily upon him, whom the true plea of the Christian faith commends to You. But, by the help of Your grace, may he deserve to escape the judgment of vengeance, he who, while he lived, was marked with the seal of the Holy Trinity. You who live and reign forever and ever. Choral Fugue Non intres in judicium in C-sharp minor.mp3 Choral Fugue Non intres in judicium in C-sharp minor.pdf

This composition originally started out with the intended goal of serving as an exercise in textual intelligibility, a skill which has often been found lacking in many of my previous vocal works and choral writing. As such, this one has turned out far more homophonic in style than the rest of my earlier production, since in seeking to keep the text as clear and understandable as possible, distinct contrapuntal possibilities were rendered moderate to negligible. The reason I originally sought to approach the text from this angle throughout had a lot to do with the reasons for its choice. As of now, I have submitted one of my newly composed pieces to an ongoing composition contest centered around vocal sacred music. While I cannot give away many details concerning this competition as of now, in accordance to its rules I cannot yet publish the work I submitted (lest I might end up disqualified for early publication, given that, to my understanding at least, submitted works are to remain unpublished until the jury has decided). Instead, now that the submission had been fully dealt with, I set out to finish this early alternative, which I had deemed far too bland for the requirements and expectations of the contest before it was even complete. It should also be worth noting that for the first time now I have switched from my usual vocal renderings using Cantāmus to a different software integrated directly into MuseScore 4 named Cantai, which procedurally renders the text to be sung locally while conveniently allowing for modifications in real time and hosts a much greater variety of voices, not to mention the general audio quality being, in my view at least, far more pleasant to the ear. Thus, after trying it for a few weeks now, I have at last decided an upgrade in sound quality to my renditions was finally in order. YouTube video link: Gustate et videte Communion Motet in G major.mp3 Gustate et videte Communion Motet in G major.pdf

You're absolutely correct actually, I used the Modern Italian form of the term as opposed to the older, archaic spelling often used in character markings. Thank you for the pointer. The tempo markings I normally used a while back, especially in 6/8 time signature, are often problematic due note value being referenced as a dotted quarter note, ergo implying a binary subdivision where in practice the character of the piece transmits a more ternary character, probably more suited to a 3/4 time signature with a regular quarter note tempo marking. I shall take this into account for future compositions to which such criteria may apply. Thank you kindly for your review. Considering you mentioned the theme of the fugue as innovative, I will take the liberty to share with you a fugue by fellow forum member @mossy84 , whose subject was derived from this very one (https://www.youngcomposers.com/t45451/fugue-using-a-subject-from-fugax-contrapunctus), as well as another one of my previous fugues with a rising chromatic subject, considering its similarity with this fugue's main countersubject (https://www.youngcomposers.com/t45086/fugue-in-g-sharp-minor-no17). Hope you enjoy! -Fugax Contrapunctus

A 7-voice canon I have been recently working on with the intent of following the rules of counterpoint while employing a somewhat unorthodox usage of extended harmonies and tonally-adjecent suspensions, featured heavily in the minor 2nd intervals produced by the maintained rhythms of each subsequent entry in the opening section. The text corresponds to Bible verse Matthew 28:5, translated as follows: "But the angel said to the women in response: 'Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified'." The addition of the initial "et" conjunction to the Latin text is not present in the Vulgate version of this passage, however its inclusion was deemed necessary to accommodate for the prosodic adaptation of the entire verse across the whole piece without disturbing the flow of the initial suspensions. The choice of the text was based around Bible verses mentioning angelic contact, and more specifically those containing the phrase "fear not"/"be not afraid" as a more secular reference to the niche Biblically-Accurate Angel meme trend which inspired the compositional concept at the core of this piece. YouTube video link: Canon at the 2nd a 7 in F-sharp minor.mp3 Canon at the 2nd a 7 Et respondens autem angelus dixit.pdf

The starting key is technically F-sharp minor. I'm guessing you assumed it was E major since the 2nd entry is in its relative minor, C-sharp. The coda is in F-sharp/G-flat major, the relative major of the initial key. Thus, one could say it goes full-circle before the ending. Thank you kindly for your observations. Even though my Pantonal Perpetual Canon series is not yet over, I have been stuck for months on developing others of its type. Even though the contrapuntal possibilities might as well be infinite, the formula and its configuration are now so strictly defined all the parameters involved seem to stifle new ideas and actively work against more unconstrained developments (admittedly an ironic outcome considering the core message of this one canon in particular). As such, I will have to bring it to a pause until I regain the inspiration and creative spark necessary to keep working on them. Until then I should once again focus on choral music due to circumstances I cannot fully disclose yet, but which (with enough luck) may see one of my pieces performed for the first time ever! Although such a dream is still as uncertain as it could be, the mere possibility fills me with hope. Expect future updates on this around the turn of the year!

Not sure what you're referring to, the choir is evidently above the orchestra both in the score I first provided and the one I last uploaded before you made your comment. Perhaps you meant the choir parts should be placed between the string orchestra and the woodwinds? Again, not sure where you're getting this from. It doesn't take a full woodwind section of geniuses to figure out the general character of the piece based on the articulation of the string entries preceding them and play their own expected articulations in accordance. Which enharmonic notation ends up in the final part scores will be completely dependent on the contours and intervals of the main theme according to the requirements of the resulting key per each entry/transposition so as to avoid said cognitive dissonance allegedly present in the current version of the score. The latter, as the main score including all parts, is not meant to serve as a dedicated particella for each individual performer, but merely as a general visualization of the flow of counterpoint across all entries and transpositions. I could, but the mezzosopranos can reach that B natural just fine. Despite the voice crossing, which is to be expected in settings with this many voices, swapping their melodies in that specific spot, or any other for that matter, would most likely completely sacrifice the melodic contour in either case, not to mention putting the whole structural integrity of the coda into jeopardy. In my view, the detriments of changing it far outweigh the benefits, so it will stay as it currently is. Thank you for clarifying. It would have been exceedingly hard to tell otherwise unless you had included any technical commentary of note about the music itself instead of focusing exclusively on notation nitpicks pertaining to the scoring alone. Have a wonderful day.

To highlight a few key differences between either piece, in Chopin's prelude the melodic contour seeks minimalism in a way that balances out the listener's focus and allows the left-hand chords to shine and be heard more clearly. However, in my composition, the melody is most of the time merely a product of the top line of the right-hand chords and while it does produce a distinctive effect due to the rhythmic motif and its characteristic contiguously rising and falling eighth note in the 4th beat of its initial measure, it is not a sufficiently distinctive part to be considered, in my view, integrally alienable from the lower voices or the right-hand chord progression as a whole. Well, some earlier pieces of mine, composed almost exclusively for piano specifically, were mostly focused on styles closer to that of this composition than those of my usual production, such as in this post: https://www.youngcomposers.com/t44435/triwaltzia-no-1 You're correct in pointing out the deviation from my usual style with heavy counterpoint. The title, however, was not actually a strict or entirely accurate stylistic descriptor, and instead it purely serves as an indicator of a particular style I sought to emulate from the Romantic era. It obviously does not account for the entire range of styles and genres that this period in the history of Western classical tradition has to offer, but instead builds an association based on the "vibes" of the music, if I may use such a term. I especially agree with your first line of criticsm: the constant reiteration of the same rhythmic motif ending up producing a far too monotonous, repetitive or boring impression was indeed a concern even before this piece was finished. However, every time I tried to vary the rhythms or change the bass, it felt jarringly sudden and unexpected, breaking pattern in a way that not only was far from subtle, but also completely imbalanced considering the listener's expectations after the first couple phrases. Adding a contrasting B section with an entirely different theme might have solved the issue, but I failed to execute such an option in time before the whole piece was nearly complete. The density of the chords doesn't concern me nearly that much. Reducing the number of internal voices in the middle sections seemed to create the same unexpected vacuum I just described, so as long it doesn't get in the way of the dynamic contrast across the piece I personally see no problem with it, since I'm certain any sufficiently skilled pianist would be able to perform those in spite of the uniform chord density throughout. I'm interpreting what you mean by the bass being "underused" as not providing sufficient rhyhtmic or schematic variety, which could just as easily be referring to the right hand chords, just as in your first point. As for the arpeggios, I disagree with the premise that it is merely an effect: it is integral to the motif across the whole composition. I do understand what you actually mean by that, however: it once again comes back to the original line of criticism. The bars you mentioned were unplayable without additional arpeggios merely included a major 9th and 10th. The 10th in question has been edited to an octave for easier performance with a smaller handspan, even though it is still arpeggiated. However, that doesn't solve the rest of the 10th in the 2nd beat of each measure in that sequence, so sorry in advance to pianists with smaller hands: I must admit feasible playability is still not my main priority (ah, what would I do without the wonders of modern technology...) Anyway, thank you kindly for your review and points of criticism. I will most likely take them into careful consideration when setting myself to write compositions similar to this one.

Thank you for your review. I should point out, however, that the chorus is intended to sound louder in order for the lyrics to be at the very least audible and not drowned by the orchestra, let alone trying to make them sound barely intelligible. I find it optimal since the choir is singing the canon in th exact same configuration as the other instrumental sections: the placement of the voices across different lines and registers is the exact same for all three. And also, there is no brass in the score or audio. This is not intended as a symphonic orchestral arrangement, and I personally dislike the timbre of brass instruments and even some woodwinds such as the saxophone for example, so they are not getting included in the score anytime soon. Have a nice day.

A lighter composition for the early Summer, conceived as an exercise in harmonic development, apoggiaturas and chromatic saturation. Greatly inspired by Chopin's Op. 28 Prelude in E minor. YouTube video link: Funereal Postlude Waltz in A minor.mp3 Funereal Postlude Waltz in A minor.pdf

A revamped and corrected version of a previously published prelude and fugue transposed from F-sharp minor to E minor, originally comprised of two separately uploaded works joined together as neatly as possible. YouTube video link: Prelude and Fugue in E minor.mp3 Prelude and Fugue in E minor.pdf

As stated in the title, I've been recently experimenting with ways to add more voices to Bach's 14 canons (BWV 1087) based on the multiple contrapuntal transformations of the harmonic bassline of the Goldberg Variations' Aria. Despite being derived from the tonally transposed inversion of that main theme, the so-called "Theme 2" has been kept separate across this whole compendium since it isn't contrapuntally compatible with its inversion when also retrogradated, syncopated or played with "per arsin et thesin" imitation simultaneously. Had the latter not resulted in whole segments of parallel ocatves, an 8-voice "omnibus" canon might have been possible, but that seems to be out of the scope of these musical materials without significant alterations that would render their canonic accompaniment non-imitative and thus, non-canonic at all. There is one canon from the original that is conspicuously absent from this recollection and that is the penultimate, 13th variation: a triple canon a 6 so densely packed and finely tuned in its original conception that adding more voices without irrecognizably altering the basic structure of the others turned out to be practically impossible. Almost like Bach himself knew this one canon, in its apparent simplicity yet brilliantly complex counterpoint, was the worthiest and most perfect when he chose to be depicted holding it for his portrait. Admittedly, this video would have been better suited for this year's 276th anniversary of Bach's passing (July 27th). However, due to my tightly packed schedule this summer, I find it highly unlikely I'll be able to post anything in time to commemorate that date, hence why I'm posting this video as soon as possible in order to leave room for focusing on my final exams. Lastly, it would be short of an understatement to recognize late Gerubach's video on the 14 Canons proved invaluable to my understanding, research and tinkering with these canons, as well as the core material of much of Bach's repertoire as a whole. Some of his most laborious contributions have since been taken down after his passing more tha three years ago now in 2023, such as for example the scrolling video on the Art of the Fugue. The quality of my scrolling certainly doesn't come anywhere close to his standards, and yet, as poor and humble a homage this may be, I have chosen to honor his memory and the tireless spirit of his countless contributions by acknowledging at the very least the gargantuan influence he has had on the accessible spread of Bach's music and its myriad intricacies. YouTube video link: Google Drive folder link (full score + audio): https://drive.google.com/file/d/15rJHDw9G3SUX6rtj0w6V88JuirWnBOxq/view?usp=sharing J. S. Bach's 14 Canons BWV 1087 Vocibus Pluribus Additis.mp3 J. S. Bach's 14 Canons BWV 1087 Vocibus Pluribus Additis.pdf

Since today is this year's Mother's Day, I finally decided to finish revamping a composition I had already published for the very same occasion 3 years ago. Compared to the original, the whole piece has been transposed from E to B minor in order to better accommodate for newly included passages. However, still not dissimilar from the first drafts, passages with constant false relations are abundantly featured in this piece, to the point that the harmonic resolutions expected of more conservative counterpoint are frequently sacrificed for the sake of chromatic saturation. Scrolling video link (YouTube): Passacaille en Valse in B minor.mp3 Passacaille en Valse in B minor.pdf

At the request of one of my subscribers, I decided to try my hand at writing a passacaglia emulating the style of French Baroque composer François Couperin. While both my research and efforts may have proven relatively insufficient in convincingly imitating most of the intricacies found within his keyboard style to the fullest extent, I am nontheless pleased with the results of this little experiment. This work is supposed to be understood as a two-part ouverture as a whole: the first movement is comprised by a prelude riddled with double-dotted rhythmic figures very much intentionally reminiscent of other French Baroque ouvertures, specially those of Jean Baptiste Lully. The passacaille itself follows a strict repetition of the same harmonic baseline throughout the first two variations, which is then slightly altered in a kind of quodlibet by non-strict canonic imitation reaching up to 4 voices, followed by a coda almost identical to the last phrase of the prelude. Thankfully I finally found a way to switch between soundbanks of my harpsichord soundfont automatically amidst playback, which in turn allowed me to include various registers of the instrument across diverse sections of the piece, namely three: Grand Jeu (literally translatable from French as "Great Game": I 4' 8' II 8'), Petit Jeu ("Little Game": I 4' II 8') and Luth (the lute register, also commonly known as a compound buff stop: I 4' Lute II 8'). Eventually, this composition will most likely become susceptible to getting transcribed into a 4-hands arrangement in the future, mostly due to the large intervals in some measures that can only be covered that way. For now, this version may stay as it currently is, since any difference between this iteration and said arrangement would otheriwse be completely imperceptible using digital playback. Scrolling video link: French Ouverture - Prelude and Passacaille in F minor.mp3 French Ouverture - Prelude and Passacaille in F minor.pdf

Funnily enough, it's very telling of commenters who don't have much of substance to say about the overall quality of my work when they start pointing out the most banale, trivial nitpicks. Not your case by any means, but it's a relatively common occourrence in the comment sections of some my videos. Things like "this is supposed to be 3/4, not 6/8 meter" or "the panning of the background choir doesn't match that of the Cantāmus one". I wouldn't say it's a matter of reputation. I also wouldn't write such replies unless I have any observations or criticsm of substance to offer, as I believe it's a waste both of my time and that of the composer whose work I'm reviewing. Besides, this composition is technically a revised version of and older work: a repost, if you will, so I wouldn't blame more seasoned members who frequently comment on my posts for merely withholding what has already been said before. I had never tried this double-scoring method before, and I must admit it sounds as effective in rendering more human-like expression as much as it seems to pose a whole lot of work. The closest thing to this I usually do is manually inputting the exact tempo gradation values for the ritardandi at the end of each piece, since before MuseScore 4 came out there was no way to insert working rallentandi automatically into the score, or at the very least, not that I knew of. So in order to cover my tracks while still keeping those tempo markings functional, I manually alter the text format to make them invisible, even inside the program itself. That alone often turns out to be an absurdly tedious process and I hate it. At the moment I doubt I could even imagine myself inputting all those rubatos and expression markings and then subjecting those to the same formatting process without cleaving my head open in half out of exasperation. Even if the improvements were marginally or even substantially noticeable, I have much more valuable things to do with my time than attempt to "humanize" the recording manually. The mere thought of engaging in such a tiresome toil for a result that could far more accurately and naturally be replicated through MIDI input or a simple performance recording sends me quite aback. I've heard of this software before. A Discord user by the name of @grpnr1345 applied the software's protocol's to one of my earlier fugues under the same guise, and the results were mixed for me, because the sampling and reverb values were just deplorable, turning the overall timbral quality of the piece essentially into a downgrade, but the altered recording itself, as well as the intricacies of its transformation, felt rather convincing. For context, the audio file in question has been attached to this post. Lastly, thank you kindly for your detailed review. As for the software you mentioned, you're free to apply the Lilypond protocol to my score whenever you feel like it or have time for it. It will most definitely be interesting to see how different users of the same software modify music in the same style, so you have my full permission and encouragement to "humanize" the recording as you see fit. Fugue in G-sharp minor No. 17 Pablo Marinero Cueto 2023 - Zell 1737.mp3 Fugue in G-sharp minor #17.pdf