Variations challenge on my channel.

I composed this short thematic idea and I would love to see other people create a set of variations on it. If you need more information check the description of the channel or ask me. 🙂

Interesting... You have combined a classical theme with some modern fun! I personally would find this very difficult to fathom as my conditioning does not at relate to some of the tonal choices you have made. But, I am all for trying new things and so I shall post my response shortly.

I just have a couple questions:

The 16th notes you have written, is there a legitimate reason why they do not descend to the 7th and 3rd respectively in the manner shown below:

I personally consider the B-C-B movement as you have written it in bar one, for example, unusual. Would you care to explain your reasoning here? In addition, the F sharp presented in the bass during the cadential flourish in C Major is very alien to me and doesn't appear as a rational choice for me. Whilst I acknowledge that I have a very biased conditioning towards traditional practice, I would appreciate at least a short explanation. 

Thanks, and great idea by the way

21 minutes ago, Markus Boyd said:

Interesting... You have combined a classical theme with some modern fun! I personally would find this very difficult to fathom as my conditioning does not at relate to some of the tonal choices you have made. But, I am all for trying new things and so I shall post my response shortly.

I just have a couple questions:

The 16th notes you have written, is there a legitimate reason why they do not descend to the 7th and 3rd respectively in the manner shown below:

 

I personally consider the B-C-B movement as you have written it in bar one, for example, unusual. Would you care to explain your reasoning here? In addition, the F sharp presented in the bass during the cadential flourish in C Major is very alien to me and doesn't appear as a rational choice for me. Whilst I acknowledge that I have a very biased conditioning towards traditional practice, I would appreciate at least a short explanation. 

Thanks, and great idea by the way

 

In the 2nd measure I play D-F-G-F instead of B-F-G-F because I already play the B in the melody, I want to avoid duplicating that note. And the F# sharp is a chromatic flourish that you could consider as the V/V in first inversion. 

17 minutes ago, Ivan1791 said:

In the 2nd measure I play D-F-G-F instead of B-F-G-F because I already play the B in the melody, I want to avoid duplicating that note. And the F# sharp is a chromatic flourish that you could consider as the V/V in first inversion. 

 

Thanks for your response. Sorry, i meant to ask about the demisemiquaver's specifically in bar 1 which in my opinion should fall from d-c-b, opposed to b-c-b as you have written.

In my opinion, the tonal decisions that have been made in the second half of the theme are irrespective of the upper voice. They do not directly clash, although I think it is fair to say your approach to modulation is non-traditionalist. I always listen to the bassline on its own to hear if it makes coherent sense, and it does to an extent however the A flat is certainly surprising.  Perhaps it is meant in tongue and cheek to contradict the cliched motif that defines the upper part.

I am not trying to detract at all from the exercise, I think it is a good idea.

Well, Mozart and Beethoven use that kind of structure after using a trill that descends. I could give you and example if I remember a piece where I saw it. And also the piece doesn't modulate. 

I might modify the bass a little bit too, in the description of the video I say people can change the bass if they wish as long as they don't change the harmony of measures 5 & 6.

27 minutes ago, Ivan1791 said:

Well, Mozart and Beethoven use that kind of structure after using a trill that descends. I could give you and example if I remember a piece where I saw it. And also the piece doesn't modulate. 

I might modify the bass a little bit too, in the description of the video I say people can change the bass if they wish as long as they don't change the harmony of measures 5 & 6.

 

I think that an effective variations exercise needs to rely on a solid, and simple theme. The upper voice actually has a lot of potential, although i think with the non-chord notes (chromatic as you have put it) limits the choices one can make with respect to the upper voice. I think it needs to be made clear whether one needs to adhere to the chromatic structure as you have presented it. In my experience with theme and variations, the theme is most often simple and based upon standard models which are later expanded upon. A more complex theme without a clear model, in places, makes expansion more difficult for obvious reasons.

I actually did a number of variations on a theme with a member of this forum (Gulliem) and it was good fun and is posted somewhere here.

41 minutes ago, Markus Boyd said:

I think that an effective variations exercise needs to rely on a solid, and simple theme. The upper voice actually has a lot of potential, although i think with the non-chord notes (chromatic as you have put it) limits the choices one can make with respect to the upper voice. I think it needs to be made clear whether one needs to adhere to the chromatic structure as you have presented it. In my experience with theme and variations, the theme is most often simple and based upon standard models which are later expanded upon. A more complex theme without a clear model, in places, makes expansion more difficult for obvious reasons.

I actually did a number of variations on a theme with a member of this forum (Gulliem) and it was good fun and is posted somewhere here.

 

Well, in the description of the video I say this isn't the most simplified version. It is also an exercise for the participants to find the core structure of the theme and work on it. You can add the D# or not for example, it depends on whether you consider it important or not (I wouldn't). 

2 hours ago, Markus Boyd said:

Interesting... You have combined a classical theme with some modern fun! I personally would find this very difficult to fathom as my conditioning does not at relate to some of the tonal choices you have made. But, I am all for trying new things and so I shall post my response shortly.

I just have a couple questions:

The 16th notes you have written, is there a legitimate reason why they do not descend to the 7th and 3rd respectively in the manner shown below:

 

I personally consider the B-C-B movement as you have written it in bar one, for example, unusual. Would you care to explain your reasoning here? In addition, the F sharp presented in the bass during the cadential flourish in C Major is very alien to me and doesn't appear as a rational choice for me. Whilst I acknowledge that I have a very biased conditioning towards traditional practice, I would appreciate at least a short explanation. 

Thanks, and great idea by the way

 

I also noticed the F# of the 7th measure is like a recall of the F# from the augmented 6th. It is like a way of balancing it making both Ab and F# resolve to G. (I notice it now because I compose by ear most of the time.)

27 minutes ago, Ivan1791 said:

Well, in the description of the video I say this isn't the most simplified version. It is also an exercise for the participants to find the core structure of the theme and work on it. You can add the D# or not for example, it depends on whether you consider it important or not (I wouldn't). 

 

OK, this makes sense now. Sorry for the confusion -  i must have become confused with the traditional form of theme and variations. 

.

8 minutes ago, Jackleaf said:

https://www.noteflight.com/scores/view/a735cb1b8e44f7c1bc1acee7f73e73ae090f2a82

It's not that good I've never done variations before, I will probably give a better try again

 

You changed the melodic contour of the main melody too much. I recommend you studying a little bit Beethoven's Diabelli variations and you will see how he creates music from a very simple idea. Mozart's variations are very clear. To compose a good variation you don't only have to take into account the harmony, the melody is more important. Anyway I'm happy to see people is trying it.

@Ivan1791

Hi

If you mount a challenge based on the variation concept you should admit any possibilities. 

Do you pretend to keep what happens in both hands for a variation? I thought of writing my own one, but I'm afraid it would totally be out of context.

Why do you say that Ab is important? Interestingly it's the most dissonant spot...

On 7/1/2020 at 10:00 PM, Luis Hernández said:

@Ivan1791

Hi

If you mount a challenge based on the variation concept you should admit any possibilities. 

Do you pretend to keep what happens in both hands for a variation? I thought of writing my own one, but I'm afraid it would totally be out of context.

Why do you say that Ab is important? Interestingly it's the most dissonant spot...

 

I like to give freedom, but if someone is going to send me one variation that person can't change the core idea too much. The basic melody is C-B-F-E for the first 4 measures and if you change the order then you lose a little bit of the essence of the piece. 

You can eventually change a lot the initial idea but then you have to show its evolution. 

And I think the Ab is important because it is the note that makes that tune more unique. There I'm using a Ab maj7 (#5) in first inversion, which isn't common in music of the classical period. 

Write your variation if you wish, I can give you some feedback after you show it to me. 

Also, you can change the bass as long as you don't change key harmonic functions or that weird Ab. For example you could write I-vii°-vii°-vi because the vii° has the same function as V7 and you can do a broken cadence instead of a perfect one (V-vi instead of V-I). As long as the bass/accompaniment follows the right harmony it is fine. Of course you can make evolve the harmony until it is totally diferent but I wouldn't do that for the first variation. 

.

Here are my variations: 

On 7/1/2020 at 1:35 PM, Ivan1791 said:

And I think the Ab is important because it is the nota that makes that tune more unique. There I'm using a Ab maj7 (#5) in first inversion, which isn't common in music of the classical period. 

When I hear it without reading the score, it just sounds like V+/iv contrapuntal stream in the bass vs. the melody. A-flat would, to me, need a little bit more backing if it's not a +6 chord...

1 hour ago, Monarcheon said:

When I hear it without reading the score, it just sounds like V+/iv contrapuntal stream in the bass vs. the melody. A-flat would, to me, need a little bit more backing if it's not a +6 chord...

I think the thing that made that particular bit sound strange to me, personally, was that the chord is Ab - C - E - G in first inversion -- with an E-natural rather than an E-flat. It's an augmented chord with a major seventh, which is pretty extraordinarily wild for an otherwise Classical-sounding piece. I like the Ab there in other contexts, including an Abmaj7 chord or a Db Neapolitan chord, but the E-natural sounded off to me personally. We already had the enharmonic equivalent of Eb with the D# earlier, so I'd prefer to use E-flat there rather than E-natural. 

All in all though, I want to stress that this was a great challenge and a good theme to write variations for. Got the ideas flowing, finally.

On 7/1/2020 at 10:46 PM, Jackleaf said:

Thanks you're right, I gave one more attempt at something more melodically connected

https://www.noteflight.com/scores/view/9c7a02fc7b8ff82fc5bea3d5977ba55de8600456

I tried to put 2 repeat endings 1 ending with just 2 cs but noteflight wont allow me

 

That's way better, well done. I like the minor shift of the second measure. Is it okay if I show it on my channel?

18 hours ago, Monarcheon said:

When I hear it without reading the score, it just sounds like V+/iv contrapuntal stream in the bass vs. the melody. A-flat would, to me, need a little bit more backing if it's not a +6 chord...

 

What do you mean with "backing"? Interesting way of seeing that harmony because then it resolves to a IV. I used that without thinking about the theory, I just thought it was a funny dissonance. 

I think the best way of looking at it is as a partial minor borrowing. I don't even know if that is a thing but that is how I see it. It doesn't resolve immediately to a D minor but because of the pace it is almost as if the harmonic motion was:  bVI7 (#5) --> ii

For me it is funny because it sounds minor and major at the same way, it is ambiguous. 

.

1 hour ago, Ivan1791 said:

I think the best way of looking at it is as a partial minor borrowing. I don't even know if that is a thing but that is how I see it. It doesn't resolve immediately to a D minor but because of the pace it is almost as if the harmonic motion was:  bVI7 (#5) --> ii

I don't agree with this analysis, personally. I might even take the jazz route and call it E+(#9)/C, or V+/vi that resolves unexpectedly, since that dissonance on G vs. G-sharp is categorical. V+/IV is still the clearest reading to me, essentially saying that the G in the melody is the actual dissonance, as opposed to the A-flat in the bass.

@Noah Brode's variations and others do indeed make use of bVI, but in the theme, that is an available reading, as opposed to a strictly given one. 

11 minutes ago, Monarcheon said:

I don't agree with this analysis, personally. I might even take the jazz route and call it E+(#9)/C, or V+/vi that resolves unexpectedly, since that dissonance on G vs. G-sharp is categorical. V+/IV is still the clearest reading to me, essentially saying that the G in the melody is the actual dissonance, as opposed to the A-flat in the bass.

@Noah Brode's variations and others do indeed make use of bVI, but in the theme, that is an available reading, as opposed to a strictly given one. 

 

I think at the end it is subjective. Anyway I'm not limiting the variations to that harmony. As long as the dissonance appears in a few variations it is fine to me.

This was fun! It's been a while since I wrote something like this.