Fugue in B-flat major

Not much to say. I just spent most of yesterday working on it, and finally I could finish it today morning. I have intended it to be mostly playableas well, but I can't actually play it myself so I'm not really sure whether it is or isn't.

P.S.: In case you people really hate how harpsichord sounds on mp3, please tell me. I play the violin, so I'm quite aware how awful can an instrument sound on mp3, specially if the listener actually knows the instrument and its sound qualities which in many cases are quite difficult to emulate propperly on a digital file.

So, here it is:

Very nice fugue. I like its baroque character, and harpsichord sounds very apropiate with the style. Thanks for posting!

Not a bad fugue. Some things to consider:

1. I like the subject. However, I'm trying to figure why when you introduce it in the second voice (left hand) that you variated the ending in a way that -honestly- wasn't necessary to maintain the tonality of it. Particularly, measure 8. Was this change to insure contrary motion against the counterpoint in the right hand (notice I didn't term this material an answer or countersubject -as much of it doesn't return outside a few chosen motivic units that are really inconsequential and undeveloped)? 

2. That said, while your counterpoint is good -and the piece does maintain a perpetual motion reminiscent of most Baroque music- the fugal structure is rather weak. Aside from referencing the subject's rhythm a few times, there aren't many areas where the subject returns amongst the counterpoint -let alone even false entries. The thematic material present within the subject doesn't undergo any real development characteristically found in fugues (stretto, diminution, sequencing, imitative counterpoint, etc.) I hope this one wasn't too harsh.

Those two points said, I did enjoy the free form counterpoint -and feel you have a good grasp of it. I think most of my critique may rest with this: the true art of fugue writing can be found in the composer who uses a brevity of material and expands upon it masterfully. This is where Bach excelled above his peers. 4 bars of connected motivic material were enough to provide him an entire piece worth of music. Your material here in this can definitely hold a candle. Thanks for sharing.

Quote

 

On 12/11/2019 at 3:13 PM, jawoodruff said:

Not a bad fugue. Some things to consider:

1. I like the subject. However, I'm trying to figure why when you introduce it in the second voice (left hand) that you variated the ending in a way that -honestly- wasn't necessary to maintain the tonality of it. Particularly, measure 8. Was this change to insure contrary motion against the counterpoint in the right hand (notice I didn't term this material an answer or countersubject -as much of it doesn't return outside a few chosen motivic units that are really inconsequential and undeveloped)? 

2. That said, while your counterpoint is good -and the piece does maintain a perpetual motion reminiscent of most Baroque music- the fugal structure is rather weak. Aside from referencing the subject's rhythm a few times, there aren't many areas where the subject returns amongst the counterpoint -let alone even false entries. The thematic material present within the subject doesn't undergo any real development characteristically found in fugues (stretto, diminution, sequencing, imitative counterpoint, etc.) I hope this one wasn't too harsh.

Those two points said, I did enjoy the free form counterpoint -and feel you have a good grasp of it. I think most of my critique may rest with this: the true art of fugue writing can be found in the composer who uses a brevity of material and expands upon it masterfully. This is where Bach excelled above his peers. 4 bars of connected motivic material were enough to provide him an entire piece worth of music. Your material here in this can definitely hold a candle. Thanks for sharing.

 

 

Thank you for your criticism, for most things I think it will help me out a lot.

Regarding the first point, the subject might be alright (to some extent, I deem it somewhat boring - which is one of the main reasons why it doesn't bear the very essence of the piece on its own, due to the fact that I realized too late how disappointing the subject was). I agree the subject isn't the main problem though. Most of my compositions usually lack to a great extent an acceptable degree of structural sense (which may not be noticed in most of which I uploaded to this forum since they're among my worst - at least to my actual point of view). I know I might seem conceited comparing my own works among themselves, but the only real references I have applied to my music (those to be actually conscious of) is Bach, and Of Course I wouldn't dare at all comparing myself to him! (Honestly, who would?). Even that last statement sounds too pedantic.

Regarding the second point, it's all true - and despite being aware of my persistent mistakes I'm often incapable of applying counterpoint variatons on my composing, mainly due to the fact that by the time I try to introduce them into a new composition I can't find any convenient place. It's frustrating.

Anyway, thank you very much four your criticism, it has actually been so helpful, not harsh at all, and mostly encouraging. Thanks.