Lesson with composerorganist (General Composition)

So, what should we work on?

I was thinking we could maybe go over the invention you wrote again, but if you want we can just go directly to something else.

Up to you.

Going over the invention again would be fine if you have more that can be taught from it.

Do you want to get some practice with fugue -- haven't done that yet. I know there are threads on the nuts and bolts and I have plenty of models to study from the organ literature and some vocal music I have at home.

Pardon the indecision, it comes from all the info I have been learning from this intense 2 week crash course on being a Teaching Arts for kids and teenagers.

Well, fugue writing sounds like a good idea for you, considering you already know a bunch of the literature we'll be referring to.

So, in that line, do you want to do something like a style copy, or a modern-ish fugue? Up to you really.

Fine either way. Whatever your gut thinks would be best.

Anyway, I think it'd be best if you took a shot making a "style copy." It can be Bach, Buxtehude, etc, any baroque composer you want, or not modeling after any of them exactly and just sticking to a couple of ground rules. Technically a style copy can be in a general sense anything that would be the average of the period's harmonic/etc idiom, rather than any specific composer.

The main kick of a fugue is that it is considered a baroque free form, like fantasias or preludes (though Toccatas are more structured by Buxtehude and Bach, it's still free.) That is, you have some corner stones, but most of what you do from there onwards is up to you.

So, what you should be paying attention is the key points such as the expositions and episodes, but everything else is free within the realm of baroque instrumental counterpoint. I don't want you to write a finished thing, or a 20 minute fugue, but just a sketch or a very short fugue.

Think something like the WTC's fugues, rather short but to the point.

I'm not saying much else so I don't influence the outcome of the exercise, but remember that a style copy or writing "in style of" is not an automatic procedure, it's a real composition work. Just like I've told you to think carefully about what you were using when commenting on your invention, here the same applies.

Now, I don't expect a musicology explanation "Well I used this model from --", but much rather why you picked things, why you did this or that, etc. So along the way, put thought into it more as a composition and less as just an exercise in, say, counterpoint or any given form.

Any questions, of course, you can just ask. :>

SSC -

I have been working solely on fugue subjects and matching the affect. Below is the subject and answer (tonal answer at 5th, correct?) ONLY (no counterpoint yet) for a projected fugue in F minor - this is the first one I finally like. I'll post one or two more and then proceed after you review.

Oy, I'll post a correction for your answer here, you made a bunch of errors which had you gone out to write the entire thing would've made for a lot of really tedious fixing.

The errors were, for one, your transposition made no sense. You only had to change the starting interval (C -> F) rather than (C -> A.) It's like this, if you write a tonal answer of a subject that starts with a 5th jump, that 5th jump is inverted in the answer so you get a 4th (and use the same notes.)

In this case, F -> C becomes C -> F. That's typical. Also, you MUST keep the saltus doriusculus as such in your answer and all subject entries, or it'll be inconsistent with the use of that affect. You never really find any (that I know of) examples of an answer doing a 6th jump where the subject had a 5th. For one because the complimentary interval of the 6th is a 3rd, and second because it kills the character of the subject. 5th jumps are used to establish a tonal center, and not only that but any perfect 5th jump can as well be considered a cadence implication.

Also, your answer for some reason had part of it in major (why E natural?) Normally your tonal answer has to be also in minor if your subject is in minor. So yea, I fixed it up for you so you can see what I changed.

Anyways, now you can continue without worrying about having to rewrite the entire fugue cuz your answer was weird. :>

Baroque Fugueb.sib

SSC -

Thank you SOO much. I was concerned about the leap to a 6th. I will read closely my Jeppeson and Kennan on subject/answer entries and fugue.

This, by the way, may explain why I kept very close (or copied) my intervals in my Invention -- I never had a solid understanding of answers!

Oh and I love that term - saltus doriusculus - I just did a little research and see Schutz (in his Sieben Worte) used the "hardened leap" (wider chromatic leaps by 6th's, 7th's, diminished and augmented intervals ) to the words "I am thirsty" and that may be where the term may be derived (cite: Chromaticism By Vladimir Barsky, Romela Kohanovskaya). Aren't famous examples of this affect in Bach's chorale setting of Durch Adams Fall (BWV 637) from his Organ Chorales and in the F minor keyboard Sinfonia ?

I'd like to do more fugues after this to get down the details. If you know of any other texts about Baroque affect let me know.

Well the "doriusculus" prefix is just "pain" more or less. So, the passus doriusculus is, uh, a painful step (or steps of pain!) and saltus doriusculus is a jump(ing?) pain (or painful jump.)

Want a super simple example of it? D minor invention by Bach contains the saltus doriusculus as the main important point of the subject. Not only that, but it corresponds pretty well with the D minor affect (aggressiveness) as it's not handled like the saltus doriusculus in, say, the musical offering subject. ETC.

Hey, you counterpointing people: it's "saltus" or "passus" "DURISCULUS". :)

Passus duriusculus Nein.

Check your info if you want to bother posting here. :>

Thanks palestrina!

Durisculus.

Doris makes me think of dorsal and dolphins. Can't believe I did that!!!

Anyway SSC her is my 11 bar exposition. I want to keep this to three voices. Having a little trouble writing an episode -- every attempt has the piece going nowhere rather than harmonically somewhere (I like going to the vi area so far).

PS. I neede to insert a short 2 bar sequence/episod to get the third entry in.

SSC - made a few corrections.

Thanks palestrina!

Durisculus.

For the record, he was wrong. It's not "dorisculus" unless I've seen it spelled wrong in every single source I have ever seen on the topic, thx.

Questions - I was playing around stating the subject and answer in the v ( C minor) but the answer that appears is very suggestive of that. The transposition I came up with to solve this ends up modulating to G minor. So, this would not be usable as a middle entry correct? Or, is it OK for the answer to become the subject in C minor?

The nice thing is the answer could be a real on starting on G and imply g minor and a harmonic motion of ascending 5ths.

Question - I was playing around stating the subject and answer in the v ( C minor) but the answer that appears is very suggestive of that. The transposition I came up with to solve this ends up modulating to G minor. So, this would not be usable as a middle entry correct?

Um, there wouldn't be any problem if you modulate into C minor for the middle entry, since you would tonal-answer it just as you did the initial exposition. IE, you would have C-G rather than C-F in c minor, and in the answer G-C rather than G-D, so you don't modulate. Same principles as your initial exposition.

For the record, middle entries are sort of free, along with whatever comes around them. You don't really need to state the subject again until the very end or at all. Basically then it's a matter of preference since there are no real laws for how often middle entries have to show up. Likewise, you don't need augmentation or diminution or even a single stretto. All of this is optional, you barely even need inversions or retrogrades either.

So, if you want to keep it simple you can. Complication is no measure of quality after all.

Thanks SSC for answering so quickly. You are EXCELLENT!

SSC -

Did the exposition and sequence and then got stuck getting to a middle entry - the one on C minor was just too dull. Just let me know if the modulation to G minor is OK.

OK, first off, you may want to consider D natural at the start of the 8th measure in the right hand then Db in the left hand. This should put you right back into F minor without going too far away (and this IS still the initial exposition, so you don't want to go harmonically far here.)

Also, you have to define what your subject really is. Where does it end exactly? To me, it ends in F (2nd beat) and you repeat this twice the same exact way, so when the subject comes in the 3rd voice you can't just cut it off in measure 12. You need that ending section that descends to F. It's a characteristic motive, you can't simply cut it off and expect it to work.

So, you need to modify that section in measure 12, so that your middle voice goes Ab G F while the top voice starts the answer. Otherwise you would contradict the model you had going which, at such an early point, would be pretty atypical for an in-baroque-style fugue.

As for the later part, measure 15 also cuts off the subject's end again. Also, measure 15 looks mighty difficult to play, so it's arguable that you should probably add the right ending to the subject and avoid the voices spreading out so much.

The pivot chord there (the D major without 5th) in measure 18 is a little too abrupt. If you're going to G minor, you probably need something a little more established to drive it home, at the very least more cadence implications than a simple semitone (F# -> G.) Try the 7th, and also delaying some the introduction of the subject in G until you've gone through establishing the key. As for form, it's more common that it modulates to C minor rather than the double dominant. It can happen though that you can go F minor -> G major -> C major as a modulation sequence.

But G major and G minor are rather far apart to just switch mid-way, so think carefully what you want.

So, look at these things and see what you can do about'em. Pretty good so far considering you don't have a lot of experience on the subject.

Thanks SSC. Msr 8 is tricky but I like this suggestion better - forms a nice cross relation within the bar. Msr 12 I was able to fix and the results are much better.

Yes, msr 18 is difficult but I can play those tenths pretty easily (I do have a large hand span:cool:). Sadly though you are right the subject gets cut off and the transition to g minor is abrupt.

I appreciate your patience in this. It is difficult and time consuming to achieve correct counterpoint while creating a natural sense of harmonic/melodic flow plus adhere to the Baroque style.

It gets easier the more you do it. :>

SSC -

Said some of this in the shoutbox but to reiterate, first is the revised exposition and sequence leading to C minor middle entries. I have been thinking that it would be great to have as a harmonic plan something reflected in the subject. F - C - G - A flat - then move back to the tonic but eventually with the diminished shord spelled in the subject heard as a chord and an ending similar to the C minor fugue in Book1 of the WTC - short semi- recitative ending. I think it would give the piece a nice formal/harmonic structure.

The second piece is for two cellos and a sketch for a possible fugue or invention. I have all the materials there, just needs some more music and the harmonic/melodic development elaborated. Would love to hear your ideas of how to proceed. Oh btw, celli playing in close intervals around middle C sounds fantastic - really intense and beautiful!

Sorry for the delay.

As for your progress in the fugue, it's pretty good so far. I have nothing to add really and all the previous problems seem to be gone now, so keep up the good work. What you're doing with the episode at the end is quite nice and I think you've gotten the hang of it by now, it seems.

The thing for Cello, well, has a really nice subject there, but I think that you're not exploiting what you can do with the instrument. Also, unless you're going for major/minor tonality (actually writing in G major,) you can deal away with the key signature, specially if you're going to be using more accidentals later on or mixing things up.

What you want to think about, if you have two cellos, you can see how you can use techniques such as sul tasto, sul ponticello, harmonics or pizzicato for example in conjunction with counterpoint (modern or otherwise) and try to generate different textures. There are a lot of things you can do, really, and you should consider it beyond just thinking about it being a proto-fugue or invention. I think it's good idea that you look up the instrument and see what it can do before you tackle something like this so you know what your options are.

Also, since your subject has a sort of modal sound to it, you should probably think carefully if you really want a fugue in the sense of answering at the 5th, maybe you can use other intervals, or answer at the octave if you don't want to lose the modal character of it. One of the things you should be paying attention to is that if you want to keep the character of the subject you need to have a minor 7th rather than a major 7th as to have no leading note (c rather than c# in the beginning.) This can also apply to the counterpoint between the voices (If it's at the 5th your answer can start in A, so you have g rather than g#, but you have to add a c#.) Though, really, you can also play with transposition without accounting for sharps or flats (transpose to A without altering the c) etc.

Another tip is that you can make a rather nice good use of the 2 voices in 1 technique on the cello, as Bach often does. Though how you use it that's up to you.

Thanks SSC for the tips. All good ideas. If I had more time with this assignment and if we had much better sight readers I would have exploited the techniques - but you are right that I wanted to focus on modal counterpoint. Did complete the middle entry in C minor for the fugue. Hardest thing now is varying the harmonic rythmn and avoiding excessive "note spinning". I realize now this subject lends itself to this since as QC says it is a rather active subject and one that doesn't lend itself easily to stretto and alot of canonic procedures.

Well, there are different characteristics that can determine what is "easier" to do using traditional instrumental counterpoint ala Bach or Buxtehude, etc. Repeating notes for example serve great if you're doing strettos, while subjects with complicated melodies make it easier to avoid using any of those techniques since they are already flashy enough.

Another thing to remember is that fugues don't really end with Bach, Mozart and Beethoven wrote their share and it's always been a recurring type of composition. But, by romantic and later composers, the tendency is what can first be witnessed with Mozart, where it becomes harder and harder to tell the subject apart from the other counterpoint techniques (episodes, etc) so your form isn't so clearly well defined. Look at Grieg's fugue for string quartet for example, it's a brilliant example of "mixed form" where you have sometimes the subject only as accompaniment to what is a regular sonata theme. This tendency to mix things up is ever present by the late 19th and early 20th century and even then it's hard to say that, just to name an example, Faur

Sorry for the delay, I'll get on this ASAP. I'm honestly really busy and I've barely been home at all, sorry again.

SSC -

No problem. I have more material anyway. So hold off comment right now as I intend to finish this before the end of the month.

PS I hope you are busy with good stuff!