WIP: Scherzo in D

I have completed the Scherzo section of my Scherzo. Okay, let me explain. I am writing in Scherzo and Trio form. I have completed the Scherzo part of that form. At first, I didn't have a pickup measure, but I decided that it was needed for my Scherzo to feel right. The Scherzo section of it further divides into 2 parts

In the first part of it, the overall harmonic motion is from D to G and back. The Scherzo section of the piece has a motive that very frequently shows up in the melody. I end the first part of the Scherzo section with a syncopated cadence(both in the sense that it is on a weak beat and in the sense that the bass and melody are offset by an eighth note).

In the second part of it, I use the circle of fifths to modulate from D major to D minor. I then have the Scherzo phrase appear once again in D minor. Then, I have a first and second ending where the first ending has a half cadence that leads back to the modulation and the second ending has an authentic cadence in D minor that leads into the Trio section, which is also in D minor. In the circle of fifths modulation, there is a Neopolitan chord that seemlessly goes from the circle of fifths modulation to the dominant of the key. The authentic cadence in the second ending has an augmented sixth chord that I added to confirm the modulation to D minor.

I am working on the Trio right now. This is how I planned out my Scherzo:

Scherzo - Trio - Scherzo Da Capo - Coda

What do you think of my Scherzo section? Audio ends at 1:29

I think it's fine, although the stops in the cadence m. 16-17 sound a bit awkward. The resolution here m. 17-18 is in parallel motion but with a retardation in the right hand. I would change it.

1 hour ago, Luis Hernández said:

I think it's fine, although the stops in the cadence m. 16-17 sound a bit awkward. The resolution here m. 17-18 is in parallel motion but with a retardation in the right hand. I would change it.

 

Well, I was aiming for some syncopation, thus the rests and the eighth note offset between the melody and the bass in measures 17-18. Syncopation, I know is a good way to add humor to music, but more importantly, when the melody came to me, it came to me with that syncopated cadence. I tried to make it less awkward by having the melody continue to play for a bit when the bass stops and having the bass continue for a bit when the melody stops, making the length of a stop in both hands an eighth rest, even if the length of the stop in 1 hand is longer than an eighth rest.

And you're right, I do see parallel octaves with a retardation in the right hand. I can easily change it so that the left hand in measure 17 goes up to G instead of down to C#. Still a leap of a third and still consonant with the harmony, but the parallel octaves are avoided in place of a fourth moving to an octave

@caters  I never think nor say anything is wrong. One element may sound strange or not depending on what is happening, on the background.

When something unusual happens in a piece of music (let's say a dissonance, a rest, a syncopation) the listener will think it's a mistake. But if you repeat that element, it becomes "normal". In other words: repetition legitimizes.

Here you have prepared the rests in the right hand, in m. 3 and 9, it's nice. What is new is the left hand rests. The first time I hear it it sounds odd. In the repetition, I know what to expect. So I think you're using quite well this resource.

You mix syncopation with off-time notes. I don't know how to translate into English "contratiempo", I think it could be "off-time". It's not the same.

11 hours ago, Luis Hernández said:

@caters  I never think nor say anything is wrong. One element may sound strange or not depending on what is happening, on the background.

When something unusual happens in a piece of music (let's say a dissonance, a rest, a syncopation) the listener will think it's a mistake. But if you repeat that element, it becomes "normal". In other words: repetition legitimizes.

Here you have prepared the rests in the right hand, in m. 3 and 9, it's nice. What is new is the left hand rests. The first time I hear it it sounds odd. In the repetition, I know what to expect. So I think you're using quite well this resource.

You mix syncopation with off-time notes. I don't know how to translate into English "contratiempo", I think it could be "off-time". It's not the same.

 

I never meant to imply that you said that my syncopated cadence is wrong. I was just commenting on your reply about the cadence sounding odd. Are you suggesting that I have more rests earlier on in the left hand instead of just those at measures 16, 17, and 35, like maybe at measure 10? I can easily find places within the bass line for the left hand to have a rest instead of a note, if that is what you are suggesting. And even if that isn't what you are suggesting, I still will probably add rests to the left hand in the Trio section to help provide contrast(and also to keep it from being tiring on the pianist) and possibly in a revision of the Scherzo section.

I mean, once I get the dynamic arc down, the almost constant bass arpeggiation might not fit with the piece anymore. It might be that forte moments would tend towards a sparser, more chordal bass and piano moments would tend towards a more active arpeggiated bass. Or in contrast, it might be that forte moments would tend towards a more active bass and piano moments would tend towards a sparser bass. Or it might differ from section to section as to which dynamics are more sparse and which ones are more active.

Don't worry. All we say are just opinions.

I NEVER think there is anything wrong in music. But no one can prevent that other has a feeling about what he is listening to. It's just that. So you can write in the style or manner you like, that's all. In other words, I don't suggest you have to change anything, but I imagine how I would have done it if it was my composition (which is not).