Piano trio in C minor. most 1

below is the first movement of my piano trio. which I've spent a good while working on, any feedback would be appreciated.

It's a good trio, contrast between Solo Piano and Violin/Cello Duo and Full Trio throughout the piece, contrast of octaves in the piano part, and many other things. The only thing I really question about it is the bass clef passage in measures 50-51. I understand that it's both a harmonic sequence and an application of that octave contrast I mentioned. But could it actually be played in the right hand? That's what I'm questioning, especially measure 51, which has 2 notes in a row that according to the notation are supposed to be played by both hands on the same key, G and Eb. The Ab on beat 4 of measure 50 is also the same note in both hands.

I mean, I've seen passages with notes notated like that in piano repertoire, both originals and transcriptions, but only occasionally. More commonly, when both hands are in the bass staff, I see one of these 3 things happening:

1. Left hand in Great Octave while Right hand is in Small Octave or even sometime Left hand in Contra Octave while Right hand is in Great Octave ex. Moonlight Sonata First Movement, In The Hall of the Mountain King
2. Hands intertwined, like for example the left hand playing an octave chord and the right hand playing melody within that chord, An example of this intertwined hands, though not in bass clef, is a bit in the Fugue part of Toccata and Fugue in D minor
3. Full on hand crossing, though usually, this hand crossing situation has the left hand in the Treble Clef, but low enough that it could be notated in bass clef if the composer wanted to without any real issues ex. Pathetique Sonata 2nd theme, Piano Concerto no. 21 Second Movement Piano Solo

45 minutes ago, caters said:

It's a good trio, contrast between Solo Piano and Violin/Cello Duo and Full Trio throughout the piece, contrast of octaves in the piano part, and many other things. The only thing I really question about it is the bass clef passage in measures 50-51. I understand that it's both a harmonic sequence and an application of that octave contrast I mentioned. But could it actually be played in the right hand? That's what I'm questioning, especially measure 51, which has 2 notes in a row that according to the notation are supposed to be played by both hands on the same key, G and Eb. The Ab on beat 4 of measure 50 is also the same note in both hands.

I mean, I've seen passages with notes notated like that in piano repertoire, both originals and transcriptions, but only occasionally. More commonly, when both hands are in the bass staff, I see one of these 3 things happening:

1. Left hand in Great Octave while Right hand is in Small Octave or even sometime Left hand in Contra Octave while Right hand is in Great Octave ex. Moonlight Sonata First Movement, In The Hall of the Mountain King
2. Hands intertwined, like for example the left hand playing an octave chord and the right hand playing melody within that chord, An example of this intertwined hands, though not in bass clef, is a bit in the Fugue part of Toccata and Fugue in D minor
3. Full on hand crossing, though usually, this hand crossing situation has the left hand in the Treble Clef, but low enough that it could be notated in bass clef if the composer wanted to without any real issues ex. Pathetique Sonata 2nd theme, Piano Concerto no. 21 Second Movement Piano Solo

 

just to specify on that point it's supposed to be a direct hand crossing. 

Very nice! This is very well structured and organized, and I enjoyed hearing the different ways you twisted and turned your motives to keep the piece new and fresh throughout, while still coherent and logical. I'm usually not a fan of chamber music, but this kept me interested through the entire piece. I especially liked how you handled passing the melody back and forth between the piano and the strings.

The only thing I noticed is there are a few instances where you have some pretty sharp dissonances on top of each other, like in m.43 and m.50 you have an major seventh between the E natural and the F that is a little surprising. Also in m.54 you have a minor second between the D natural in the violin and the D flat in the piano. And in  m.169 on beat two you have a D in the strings against a C in the piano followed by an Eb in the strings against an F in the piano. These are mostly pretty momentary, but it might be worth it to comb through the piece for similar cases and evaluate each individually to see if there might be a better solution. I think for the most part you can get away with it because they happen so quick, but the examples at m.43 and m.50 kind of jump out to me, I think because the dissonances are highlighted by the staccato notes.

The other thing that jumped out at me was the transition to the A major section starting at m.92. I see what you were going for using the repeated quarter note motif to transition, but it still felt a little forced to me. I also noticed there is an extra beat at the end of m.118, I wonder if this was intentional?

Overall though this is really good work. Thanks for sharing, it was a fun listen!

I enjoyed the piece.

I would remark its strong structure and the good balance between the three instruments. I like you didn't give the piano a second role.

I also noticed that E natual in some measures (50)... It is clearly a retardation, it catches my attention because it is against a second. But I don't think it sounds bad at all.

Nice job on this trio!  I feel like I can honestly say that you have definitely improved since the piano concerto movement that you had the cadenza challenge with.  I actually enjoyed the chromatic neighbor tones in m. 43 and 50 - they were almost expected in the classical period.  I like the overall dark mood you paint here.  My favorite classical pieces also tend to be the darkest (especially of Mozart and Beethoven).  One thing that jumped out at me is the B naturals you have in measures 18 beat 4 in the piano and then the violin in meas. 20 beat 4 and then again the piano in 22 and the violin in 24.  Since you change the harmony to C minor in those measures you are jumping melodically to a non-harmonic tone and it sounds wrong to me.  Either a C or an Eb would fit much better in place of that B natural to my ear.  That's just some options.  In m. 166 you have parallel fourths between the violin and cello - it didn't jump out at me as sounding wrong though.  Great use of dynamics and good ending!  Thanks for the music!

6 minutes ago, PaperComposer said:

Nice job on this trio!  I feel like I can honestly say that you have definitely improved since the piano concerto movement that you had the cadenza challenge with.  I actually enjoyed the chromatic neighbor tones in m. 43 and 50 - they were almost expected in the classical period.  I like the overall dark mood you paint here.  My favorite classical pieces also tend to be the darkest (especially of Mozart and Beethoven).  One thing that jumped out at me is the B naturals you have in measures 18 beat 4 in the piano and then the violin in meas. 20 beat 4 and then again the piano in 22 and the violin in 24.  Since you change the harmony to C minor in those measures you are jumping melodically to a non-harmonic tone and it sounds wrong to me.  Either a C or an Eb would fit much better in place of that B natural to my ear.  That's just some options.  In m. 166 you have parallel fourths between the violin and cello - it didn't jump out at me as sounding wrong though.  Great use of dynamics and good ending!  Thanks for the music!

 

thanks. currently working on the other three movements. the response I've gotten so far is a great motivator. 

I am not a theory guy or knowledgeable in classical (neoclassical?) era style music so I cannot provide too many things to help your writing.

 Funny how we each wrote music that is quite opposite. I really like this piece, though! Some very cool Rach-y sounding moments of sudden energy and a cool dark vibe surrounding it. Thanks for listening to my piece, and thank you for letting me hear yours :). 

Hi Bradley

I enjoyed this quite a bit. There were already mentions of a Beethoven/Mozart style which I liked, and I agree with the clashes in harmony our other members have pointed out in great detail.

Your adherence to the sonata allegro form gave this piece a great pace all the way throughout. One spot I don't think has been mentioned yet is your repeat of the exposition. I feel with a first and second repeat this might make it flow a bit nicer? For instance, when it closes it feels so final to me, like something new is about to happen. Maybe a more transitory tie to the beginning for the first repeat and the way you have it for the second? 

Very clean score for the most part, well done! I'm excited to hear the next movements, keep me updated !

sound's very Beethoven-ish. I mean we can't criticize you for that. If anyone's writing a trio or quartet it'd unknowingly get "Beethovenised"  (tha's my opnion.) This is a good work .

On 9/10/2020 at 4:39 AM, Thatguy v2.0 said:

Hi Bradley

I enjoyed this quite a bit. There were already mentions of a Beethoven/Mozart style which I liked, and I agree with the clashes in harmony our other members have pointed out in great detail.

Your adherence to the sonata allegro form gave this piece a great pace all the way throughout. One spot I don't think has been mentioned yet is your repeat of the exposition. I feel with a first and second repeat this might make it flow a bit nicer? For instance, when it closes it feels so final to me, like something new is about to happen. Maybe a more transitory tie to the beginning for the first repeat and the way you have it for the second? 

Very clean score for the most part, well done! I'm excited to hear the next movements, keep me updated !

 

Heya I uploaded another movement. the third. some feedback would be appreciated!