Sonatina for Violin and Piano

A chiefly didactic piece for a Grade V violinist with accompanying piano.

Hello,

The music until m.12 is very nice in my opinion. The 'oompah' figure (I am not totally sure this is the right term for this figure) in eighth notes in the piano accompaniment gives the piece an extra dancing dimension. The interaction between the violin and piano is interesting.

The sudden transition from theme A to theme B feels weird. The A theme doesn't sound finished for me. It's too short. After having extended this A theme, you can maybe try to add a transition section to make the transition from theme A to theme B smoother.
In m.29 you introduce a third melody, but I don't like this melody in contrast to the other two. The melody and accompaniment don't blend very well. Actually the notes in both the melody and accompaniment sound pretty random sometimes.

I like the dialogue between the violin and piano from m.41. Very smart!
You called this piece a sonatina and the composition sounds classical. I am curious why you didn't choose to write the composition in sonata form.
After the repetition of the first section you develop the themes a little bit, but there is no clear recapitulation.
Of course not every piece (first movement) with the name 'sonat(in)a' has to be in this form, but I would like to know your thoughts about this decision.

By the way, you really should fix the lay-out of the first four bars (and at some other places). To be honest, it's a mess at the four bars at the beginning.

Maarten

3 hours ago, Maarten Bauer said:

Hello,

The music until m.12 is very nice in my opinion. The 'oompah' figure (I am not totally sure this is the right term for this figure) in eighth notes in the piano accompaniment gives the piece an extra dancing dimension. The interaction between the violin and piano is interesting.

The sudden transition from theme A to theme B feels weird. The A theme doesn't sound finished for me. It's too short. After having extended this A theme, you can maybe try to add a transition section to make the transition from theme A to theme B smoother.
In m.29 you introduce a third melody, but I don't like this melody in contrast to the other two. The melody and accompaniment don't blend very well. Actually the notes in both the melody and accompaniment sound pretty random sometimes.

I like the dialogue between the violin and piano from m.41. Very smart!
You called this piece a sonatina and the composition sounds classical. I am curious why you didn't choose to write the composition in sonata form.
After the repetition of the first section you develop the themes a little bit, but there is no clear recapitulation.
Of course not every piece (first movement) with the name 'sonat(in)a' has to be in this form, but I would like to know your thoughts about this decision.

By the way, you really should fix the lay-out of the first four bars (and at some other places). To be honest, it's a mess at the four bars at the beginning.

Maarten

 

Maarten,

Thanks so much for such a thorough analysis of my music!

As I said before, I was writing a short piece for a student and for a self-teaching, exploring the sonata principles. I kept in mind the kinds of didactic pieces that I used to play when studying violin. It has been intended to be a one movement piece. Of course, I do accept the most of your thoughts in reference to the use of the form. In terms of the lay-out of the first six bars, could you, please, be more specific? I would appreciate your comments a lot. Thanks again!

52 minutes ago, MusicianXX12 said:

Maarten,

Thanks so much for such a thorough analysis of my music!

As I said before, I was writing a short piece for a student and for a self-teaching, exploring the sonata principles. I kept in mind the kinds of didactic pieces that I used to play when studying violin. It has been intended to be a one movement piece. Of course, I do accept the most of your thoughts in reference to the use of the form. In terms of the lay-out of the first six bars, could you, please, be more specific? I would appreciate your comments a lot. Thanks again!

 

With fixing the lay-out I mean the (visual) lay-out of the score. In the PDF you attached to your post the lay-out could (or sometimes must) be improved at some places.
These are all places where you should change the score to ordered sheet music that is easy to read:

• Mm. 1 - 4: This passage in the piano must be laid-out again, because the notes, articulation and dynamic markings and rest are overlapping each other, which makes it very hard to read (while playing).
• Mm. 19 - 20. Piano. Crescendo. This crescendo that touches the notes is not very disturbing, but if you can easily change it, change it.
• Mm. 53 - 54. Piano. Legato bow. Not very disturbing, but if you can easily change it, change it.

There are some more details, but I don't want to be that person that runs down on the details.
I hope this helps!

Thanks, Maarten!

Would you have a chance to review the PDF of "The Admiralty Walz", as you asked before? I know, it is a lot, but your opinion is important to me. Thanks again! 

Tobias

2 minutes ago, MusicianXX12 said:

Thanks, Maarten!

Would you have a chance to review the PDF of "The Admiralty Walz", as you asked before? I know, it is a lot, but your opinion is important to me. Thanks again! 

Tobias

 

Hello Tobias,

Of course, I would love to review it. Although I cannot promise I will review it today.

Maarten

9 hours ago, Maarten Bauer said:

Hello Tobias,

Of course, I would love to review it. Although I cannot promise I will review it today.

Maarten

 

So great, Maarten! Thanks!

Tobias

reposted next

On 6/27/2017 at 11:46 AM, Maarten Bauer said:

With fixing the lay-out I mean the (visual) lay-out of the score. In the PDF you attached to your post the lay-out could (or sometimes must) be improved at some places.
These are all places where you should change the score to ordered sheet music that is easy to read:

• Mm. 1 - 4: This passage in the piano must be laid-out again, because the notes, articulation and dynamic markings and rest are overlapping each other, which makes it very hard to read (while playing).
• Mm. 19 - 20. Piano. Crescendo. This crescendo that touches the notes is not very disturbing, but if you can easily change it, change it.
• Mm. 53 - 54. Piano. Legato bow. Not very disturbing, but if you can easily change it, change it.

There are some more details, but I don't want to be that person that runs down on the details.
I hope this helps!

 

Maarten,

Here is the revised version of Sonatina for violin and piano.

Regards!

21 hours ago, MusicianXX12 said:

Maarten,

Here is the revised version of Sonatina for violin and piano.

Regards!

MP3

 

 

Play / pause

• Sonatina for Violin and Piano Revised

2:04

 

 

3:12

volume

 

> next

menu

 

Sonatina for Violin and Piano Revised

 

> next

PDF

• Sonatina for Violin and Piano Revised

Good job! Great that you have revised it.

I like the development section! The interaction between the violin and piano is really nice. M.59. Something went wrong in the harmony: the music is very dissonant here and it does not sound logical. You should look at that part again.

The lay-out issues are still present. Assuming that my feedback was not clear enough, I will now give you all places where you should or even need to change the lay-out.

Mm. 1 - 4: 
Rests and dynamics everywhere. It's a mess (sorry to say).

Mm. 18 - 20: 
The cresc. in the piano part touches the left hand notes. This is, however, a minor issue.

M. 21: 
The forte touches the arpeggio. This is, however, a minor issue.

M. 40: 

The eighth rest in the left hand touches the quarter notes in the left hand.

Mm. 70 - 71: 
The dynamics, legato bows, staccato dots and rests touch each other in m. 70. Furthermore the rests in m. 71 can be omitted when you change the low G in the upper part to the same voice as the higher G.

Mm. 79 - 80: 
Again, rests touch the notes. in the left hand piano part.

Mm. 81 - 82: 
The same applies as in mm. 79 - 80: Rests touch the notes. in the left hand piano part.

Mm. 86 - 89: 

Strange rests and some touch the left hand quarter notes.

M. 90: 
The same issue: a rest touchs the left hand notes.

In conclusion, I think you have done well. Lay-out remains an issue and although laying out is considered less important than music by some souls, it is in fact very important. The clearer the score, the clearer it is for the performer(s) to analyse and understand your work, the better the music will sound and be played.

1 hour ago, ilv said:

Please reread my post. I don't think the issues I point out were corrected.

 

Thanks for your comments!

2 hours ago, Maarten Bauer said:

Good job! Great that you have revised it.

I like the development section! The interaction between the violin and piano is really nice. M.59. Something went wrong in the harmony: the music is very dissonant here and it does not sound logical. You should look at that part again.

The lay-out issues are still present. Assuming that my feedback was not clear enough, I will now give you all places where you should or even need to change the lay-out.

Mm. 1 - 4: 
Rests and dynamics everywhere. It's a mess (sorry to say).

Mm. 18 - 20: 
The cresc. in the piano part touches the left hand notes. This is, however, a minor issue.

M. 21: 
The forte touches the arpeggio. This is, however, a minor issue.

M. 40: 

The eighth rest in the left hand touches the quarter notes in the left hand.

Mm. 70 - 71: 
The dynamics, legato bows, staccato dots and rests touch each other in m. 70. Furthermore the rests in m. 71 can be omitted when you change the low G in the upper part to the same voice as the higher G.

Mm. 79 - 80: 
Again, rests touch the notes. in the left hand piano part.

Mm. 81 - 82: 
The same applies as in mm. 79 - 80: Rests touch the notes. in the left hand piano part.

Mm. 86 - 89: 

Strange rests and some touch the left hand quarter notes.

M. 90: 
The same issue: a rest touchs the left hand notes.

 

In conclusion, I think you have done well. Lay-out remains an issue and although laying out is considered less important than music by some souls, it is in fact very important. The clearer the score, the clearer it is for the performer(s) to analyse and understand your work, the better the music will sound and be played.

 

Maarten,

Thanks again for your review! Probably, I have to spread the distance between the staves to improve the layout. Thanks again!

20 minutes ago, MusicianXX12 said:

Maarten,

Thanks again for your review! Probably, I have to spread the distance between the staves to improve the layout. Thanks again!

 

That would indeed fix the most problems!

6 hours ago, Maarten Bauer said:

That would indeed fix the most problems!

 

Tobias,

I think this is more what Maarten had in mind.  

37 minutes ago, tmarko said:

Tobias,

I think this is more what Maarten had in mind.  

 

PDF

• piano violin

Precisely! Thank you tmarko for your clarification. @MusicianXX12

4 hours ago, tmarko said:

Tobias,

I think this is more what Maarten had in mind.  

 

PDF

• piano violin

Thanks, tmarko!