Fluid - Variations for Piano Solo (2018)

Hi Everyone,

Recently I have completed this piano piece which was untouched for a few years. 

It is a Theme and Variations piano solo piece depicting the fluidity of water, which is an analogy of one's life journey. Water can be shaped in different ways and has different destinations.

Although the piece was done in different years (I did the theme and the first 3 variations back in 2014), I tried my best to make the style more coherent. 

Hope you enjoy the piece!

Best,

HoYin

Again (I speak in general) I see too many octaves. I think they're fine to reinforce some parts, but when there are many of them it seems you don't write other contrapuntal possibilities the piano offers. But i's a question of taste.

Some spots seems almost impossible unless you have three hands (or you roll all the time quickly): m. 49....

In general terms, I think it's a very nice work. I like the chromatic perspective and the fact that the main theme is, sometimes, so transformed that it is hard to recognize (I like that).

There are some theoretical things I could delve into, but I'm instead going to take this time to talk about style. I know it's a theme and variations, but it seems to be all over the place, and consequently non-committal to your theme. 
In general, there's a lot of blocky, rigid voice leading which largely takes away from the fluidity of water when compared to the Debussy and Ravel water pieces. You have the right idea with the changes leading into a different form, but I lack any sense that motion is really happening, especially with the variation at E. I think that was the weakest of all the variations for that reason. For this reason I feel like this piece is extremely safe with hints of wanting to go further. Why not just go there in the first place?
The crossed voices in a lot of the more moving upper voices also feel awkward. I don't get the sense that things are moving as a unit, which detracts from the cohesiveness of the piece. Some thirds in the left hand sound weirdly classical in a modern style.
It's an interesting piece but in general doesn't capture a lot of drama when I personally listen to it.

10 hours ago, Luis Hernández said:

Again (I speak in general) I see too many octaves. I think they're fine to reinforce some parts, but when there are many of them it seems you don't write other contrapuntal possibilities the piano offers. But i's a question of taste.

Some spots seems almost impossible unless you have three hands (or you roll all the time quickly): m. 49....

In general terms, I think it's a very nice work. I like the chromatic perspective and the fact that the main theme is, sometimes, so transformed that it is hard to recognize (I like that).

3

Although piano may be the instrument I am the most familiar with besides strings, I am still learning the actual timbre of pianos.  Sometimes I am not certain if lines with higher registers alone are clear enough to be heard and can stand out when heavy accompaniment is applied, so I add octaves (unnecessarily). Are there any tips for that?

For the m.49 issue, I should have fixed that earlier. Now when I read the score again, I find some cross-hand issues that are to be fixed. Thank you for your reminder:) 

10 hours ago, Monarcheon said:

There are some theoretical things I could delve into, but I'm instead going to take this time to talk about style. I know it's a theme and variations, but it seems to be all over the place, and consequently non-committal to your theme. 
In general, there's a lot of blocky, rigid voice leading which largely takes away from the fluidity of water when compared to the Debussy and Ravel water pieces. You have the right idea with the changes leading into a different form, but I lack any sense that motion is really happening, especially with the variation at E. I think that was the weakest of all the variations for that reason. For this reason I feel like this piece is extremely safe with hints of wanting to go further. Why not just go there in the first place?
The crossed voices in a lot of the more moving upper voices also feel awkward. I don't get the sense that things are moving as a unit, which detracts from the cohesiveness of the piece. Some thirds in the left hand sound weirdly classical in a modern style.
It's an interesting piece but in general doesn't capture a lot of drama when I personally listen to it.

 

2

I know you have a good command of music theory, so I am willing to take further suggestions:) Other than the oddly placed thirds, is there anything I should be aware of too?

I may try to rewrite section E to make it more varied then. I am still thinking about how to make the passage calm while keeping the rhythm though.

For the crossed voicing issue, hmm, I would say that's one of my composing styles? When I write more sophisticated passages, I tend to add several layers of melodies which develop individually. They don't have to move together in the process, but for me, it is fine as long as those melodies unite at the end and make the journey complete. Hope it answers your comments:)

9 hours ago, HoYin Cheung said:

For the crossed voicing issue, hmm, I would say that's one of my composing styles? When I write more sophisticated passages, I tend to add several layers of melodies which develop individually. They don't have to move together in the process, but for me, it is fine as long as those melodies unite at the end and make the journey complete. Hope it answers your comments:)

This seems to be audience-dependent. You may see it as motivic development but many people will not. Most audience members won't sit down and analyze music after they hear it; it's what Schoenberg stood by when he wrote 12 tone music - 12 counting it all out was pointless.

9 hours ago, HoYin Cheung said:

I may try to rewrite section E to make it more varied then. I am still thinking about how to make the passage calm while keeping the rhythm though.

It's not really that calm now. I don't know if you've ever played repeated notes on a piano in 16ths, but getting that effect perfect is extremely difficult because the hammer needs to come back up, but at a normal level of pressure will sound percussive again. Combine this with the march-like, logarithmically-accelerating  ostinato you have and it sounds rather frantic.

9 hours ago, HoYin Cheung said:

Other than the oddly placed thirds, is there anything I should be aware of too?

The more you stick with triadic structure, the less fluid it will generally sound. This isn't true in all cases, like when Shostakovich writes his tonal fugue, but movement (motion) is required to make that work. 

Like I said before, a lot of your music looks and sounds pretty blocky because you opt to stack rather than dissipate.