Help with my Fugue

So, I have made some major progress in writing my fugal variation for The Beethoven Variations. The countersubject that I first thought up has like no contrapuntal errors with the subject at all. Here is the subject by itself:

And now marked for melodic contour:

And here is my countersubject:

Again marked for melodic contour with the subject in yellow:

Rhythmically and melodically, the 2 melodic lines are independent(even when eighth notes occur in both lines, it isn't long), but they harmonize each other. This is like the goal of counterpoint. And to think that just a few minutes and this happens without any errors at all. But, I am running into a bit of an issue.

You see, I am treating the eighth note as my unit since that is the shortest note that appears in my subject. And this worked well for my countersubject. But I am writing this fugue for string quartet, so it is a 4 voice fugue. And there are only so many things I can do in 2/4 time with the eighth note as my shortest duration. Since I have 4 voices in my fugue, I'm worried that at some point I will get homophony(same rhythm) instead of the polyphony(different rhythm) I have right now. I'm not worried about melodic independence, that will be easy. I'm only worried that at some point, previously independent rhythms will become one and the same. It is way easier for me to avoid this rhythmic homophony when the sixteenth note is my unit and I'm in 4/4. But here, the eighth note is my unit and I'm in 2/4, both making it harder to avoid rhythmic homophony.

So, do you have any tips on avoiding rhythmic homophony in my fugue, given that the eighth note is my rhythmic unit and I'm writing the fugue in 2/4 time, the same time signature as the original symphony?

Here are my previous threads where I mentioned this fugue:

And here is what my fugue looks and sounds like right now:

Beethoven's Fifth Symphony Fugue.mp3

Why can't you use shorter notes? 4 part fugues are quite complex. I shoud try it wi three voices.

1 minute ago, Luis Hernández said:

Why can't you use shorter notes? 4 part fugues are quite complex. I shoud try it wi three voices.

 

Well, I mean, I could, but I have heard several online counterpoint resources say this:

Quote

Look at your fugue subject and see what note values occur. Find the shortest one that occurs. That is the rhythmic unit for your fugue. Unless you are doing something like diminution, try to not go shorter than this rhythmic unit in your fugue.

Their reasoning behind it is basically this:

Quote

If you go shorter than your rhythmic unit, you are much more likely to run into contrapuntal errors that need fixed. And what if you fix those errors by going with even shorter note values for a melodic elaboration? Suddenly, the original subject doesn't sound like the main melody of the fugue anymore. Instead this elaborate melody sounds like the main melody. It sounds like the subject of the fugue has changed and for no good reason.

So, that is why I don't have any sixteenth notes in there yet is because I don't want it to sound like the subject is changing mid-fugue from the original Beethoven's fifth theme to some elaborate melody that is supposedly a countermelody to the Beethoven's fifth theme.

Well, I don't know.

I always read the rules, but never follow them.

I write whan I like, that's all.

Anyway, I think it's enough with the eight note as reference. ... Most fugues by Bach are made up that way.

It's important to note that your first two voices actually do violate a couple rules: for example, P5s in mm. 12-13 and crossed voices at m. 18. 
That aside, the first line oftentimes will move in what's basically constantly moving short(est) rhythmic units, for example Bach's 9th fugue in 4 voices. The time signature isn't really the issue here, since nobody really perceives that difference listening to it. You seem to have the right idea by filling in spots that have empty space, but there's no reason to have everything be so constant. Voices can take a breath in rhythmic respite without breaking any rules.

On 9/11/2019 at 5:33 PM, Monarcheon said:

It's important to note that your first two voices actually do violate a couple rules: for example, P5s in mm. 12-13 and crossed voices at m. 18. 
That aside, the first line oftentimes will move in what's basically constantly moving short(est) rhythmic units, for example Bach's 9th fugue in 4 voices. The time signature isn't really the issue here, since nobody really perceives that difference listening to it. You seem to have the right idea by filling in spots that have empty space, but there's no reason to have everything be so constant. Voices can take a breath in rhythmic respite without breaking any rules.

 

I fixed the parallel fifths with just a small tweak, but the voice crossing happens in a suspension and in the next bar, the crossing becomes an overlap and then no voice crossing afterwards. Since the crossing resolves by itself, I don't have to do anything about it, right?

I'm not really sure what you mean, but in counterpoint, voices always resolve themselves. I think it's still a rules issue, especially since the lower voice stays on the same pitch as the higher voice, before it jumps down. Whether or not you follow that rule is up to you, but it's good to know it's there.

Just want to note.... your suspension in measures 13, 16-18, 23, 26-28, 31, and 34-36 are examples of syncopation. Not sure if you're still working on this.....

1. An important component to writing contrapuntally is to allow each line to be independent, while at the same time maintaining codependency with the other voices. This is one reason why contrary motion is often times necessary. While it might seem logical to just pen a melody in the same key and then juxtapose it on top of your fugue subject.... this isn't always the best idea (as it muddies up your thematic and motivic material with too much material). Bach's fugues, for instance, work because they oftentimes expand upon motivic units found within his fugue subjects. So while the countersubject is different to the subject... they are often composed of the same micromaterials (motivic units). 

2. That said... this particular fugue subject is a bit different in nature. I could honestly play any note... while accentuating that rhythm... and you'd know that rhythmic pattern derives from Beethoven's fifth. Why? Because as Beethoven demonstrated in that work... the motif here isn't the actual notes played... it's the rhythm. Thus, your counterpoint also should've taken this into account. And that's what makes this opening not work at all. While you have a lovely countersubject... it runs in stark contrast to the subject. And in many ways, it obscures the subject to the point that the countersubject acts as the subject itself. I'm surprised none of the other people who have commented have stated this. 

I'll leave my comments to just these -since this piece may have already ended up in the recycle bin on your computer.