calle

Being an amateur, I don't need a reason, as for everything one does for pleasure; the reason is in the pleasure itself. Also, I wish to understand the music from the Masters. Maybe trying to write, in addition to listen and read, could someday disclose me more of the inner engine of their compositions.

I agree. I often wonder why instruments are in "flat" keys (the exception I can think of is the A clarinet, are there others?). It's probably because it's easier to raise a note - shortening the resonant element - than lower it? But this is another question, too many I have...

Thanks everyone. I must say, however, that I am still confused. I don't understand the idea that the "original" key of the musical idea is the best one. For example: - since I don't have absolute pitch, the melody I have in mind is usually in-between keys when I try it on the keyboard, so for example I have the tonic between A and Bb; after having heard the two notes I can easily slide the melody to one key or the other, which are (at least on the circle of fifths) very far; - if the melody in my mind (if I avoid stating the notes, just listening to intervals) is corresponding to an existing key, is really easy to shift it a few semitones above or below. And if other musical material should be the subject of refinements and adjustments, why not the key? - keeping the melody hanged to the pitch I imagined the first time, there are still two possibilities - the two enharmonic keys - I can choose. Which one? Random choice? The simplest one? (sometimes it's obvious, I think nobody writes in B#, but what about the choice between D# or Eb?) I don't think either that the historical classification of keys is still useful. Apart from evolving fashion, such classifications a) often refers to non-TET tuning and b) refer to a different diapason - among many, the still widely used 415 Hz, which is a semitone far from the modern one (so, all key feelings should be now shifted to keys a semitone lower than before). But I'm eager to read other inputs to my doubt - is there any real good reason to write in C#major or A#minor, apart complicating life to many instrumental performers?

Of course I can. But why? When I write something I adjust many things to improve the result with respect to my mind's image (I assume it's the same for others). Therefore, I was wondering whether the key itself should be like the other elements of music, something that should be carefully chosen or modified "to find the best" according to some criterion, rule, or idea. Maybe a criterion that is valid only for a certain music genre or period.

Oh my God, my poor English striked again. My question was much, much more simple. It's about the choice of the KEY. Really very sorry for your lost time. I am adjusting now the topic title and my post.

Being an amateur, with no academic curriculum, I don't know how to choose the right key for a "classical" piece I imagine. I hear the melody in my head, usually with harmony together; maybe there are also modulations, and so on. The piece seems pleasant, I play with it rearranging themes, or whatever. Bus or train commuting time, with the associated unpitched noises, is great to find musical ideas and add them in my mind. Usually I am able to name the Roman numerals of most chords, or at least have a clear idea of how they should play. I don't think about the names of the notes, just about the intervals. So, to say, my mind's image has no key yet decided: I still haven't named the notes yet. And then, I go to the computer, or the keyboard, to notate it - and my inner music does not correspond to any key! Not strange, since I don't have absolute pitch. And the problem becomes: which tonality should I chose to write? I usually stick to the nearest and easiest one for me to follow (so, for example, if what I hear is found on the keyboard to be a somewhat flat C#major, I adjust my inner image to go to Cmajor). If I have to choose between enharmonic keys, I choose the one with flats, the number of added alterations is usually smaller. I am sure this is a VERY questionable method for most of you, and that you strongly disagree! However, apart from obvious considerations (instruments' ranges, or ease of execution): are there general principles to decide the right key for a piece after the "mind's image" stage? Should the key be obvious, and I'm just not sufficiently musical? Sorry if the question seems to naive to most of you, or if it's in the wrong topic (I assume that in case the adminstrators will reposition or cancel the post).

I am curious about the tonallity... the piece could be a good excercise for younger pianists, apart being somewhat difficult to read beacuse of so many flats. But I am not criticizing! How did you decided?

I like the piece and I am also curious to see the score.

Hmmm. Have problems with music player (although other users, according to the comment, seem to be able to hear it).

Another experiment to attempt an approach of the masters... I never know if a motif is of my own, or if I heard it somewhere. Do you recognize themes from true composers? Even an appropriate citation would be a great achievement for me. Quartetto 2

True, seems Froberger. The counterpoint is very clear to hear but still a score would be very useful

A string quartet in baroquish style (sort of). Hope you enjoy Quartetto 1

I like it, especially the inversions and the final

"col" is a composed preposition, a contraction of "con il" (with the) so in my opinion I would write "col legno" Regarding "sordina" or "sordino": in Italian the mute is "sordina" (but "sordino" is often written: this may be one case Tokkemon told about, that international indications can be different from standard Italian). The indication "senza sordino" with the piano is an obsolete term to say "depress the resonance pedal" (so what is now written "Ped."). For example in Beethoven's "Moonlight" sonata, the score tells "si deve suonare tutto questo pezzo delicatissimamente e senza sordino", that is to play the movement with the resonance pedal down from the beginning to the end of the piece (Beethoven's pianos were different from today's, the resonance went down quickly anyway, so no pedal resets were necessary).

True, although in Italian "allegro" means also "bright" (e.g., for colors) which is perhaps nearer to the musical term. Some terms maintained in music their original eigtheenth century meaning, which is today lost in current Italian: for example, "divertimento" in music is related to "to go away" whereas in modern Italian a divertimento is something light and amusing. But most musical terms have still the same meaning in contemporary Italian language.