Fugue "Anno Domini 2020" in G minor.

Isn't it funny how in my second-to-last upload I said "I probably won't be uploading again till 2021", given that now I have just finished my third fugue this month? I personally find it hilarious (which can be also very easily explained by the fact my sense of humour is nothing of an exceptional virtue. Anyways...)

EDIT: uploaded the Pianola Roll edition.

While working on this fugue, which I would dare saying is my longest and best work thus far, it very serpindipitiously seemed to me that the modulations the subject progressively undergoes reminds of the succession of event this year 2020. An example of this is how, after a seemingly endless myriad of ominous chords from measures 26 to 34, which I now identify with the worst of the first COVID-19 wave in Europe, the subject re-appears in its relative major key, symbolizing the curve of the pandemic slowly plummiting from May on. Of course, many other countries in the world during this time frame had an epidemiological development not quite akin to this description, but that's how I personally lived it, hence the reason I was able to realise the similarities, I guess.

As of this fugue, I decided to compose more ortodoxly by avoiding dynamic markings (recall the instrument playing it, the harpsichord, can't accurately perform them) and by developing the material for a decent amount of time in a number of countrapunctal techniques, such as augmentation or invertible counterpoint, to name the few examples included in this fugue I can think of right now.

That being said, have a merry New Year's Eve, and a prosperous (preferably better than this one) New Year 2021. Thanks for watching.

In meas. 42 I felt like it would have been cool if the bass voice played an Eb on beat 2 to transition between the E natural and the D.  I think the pitfall of including so much free counterpoint in your fugue is that the associations between the subject and the surrounding material are lost and everything starts to be perceived as a sort of contrapuntal noodling.  I know you said you included lots of invertible counterpoint but if you don't give the listener space or a melodic hook to let them know they're hearing something familiar then they get buried in the complexity of the incessant counterpoint.  I think the fermatas in the middle of this fugue were a good idea because it gave the ear a much needed break from the incessant contrapuntal rhythms.

I do however hear that you stayed very true to the subject and had multiple entries of the subject in many different keys and sometimes even in stretto so good job there.  I am not entirely sure about the motivic unity of the episodes with the subject.  I did hear that you fragmented the subject in the bridge to bring the subject in the 3rd time in G minor again.  I think it would have helped considerably if you had a consistent counter-subject in this that was always paired with the subject - it might have given the counterpoint more logic.  Sometimes it just seems like you just go into an unrelated prelude-like treatment in between the middle entries of the subject.  The episodes should really be more based on the subject I think.

Anyway - overall it was an enjoyable fugue!  Thanks for sharing!

Impressed by the complexity of the composition, this must have been a lot of work! I agree with Papercomposer on the fact that we sometimes feel "out of breath", as it is really rich and filled with many alterations. Nonetheless, I really appreciated the listening (loved the passage from 1:10-1:20). Would be great to hear in a church though...

Thanks for sharing!

13 hours ago, PaperComposer said:

In meas. 42 I felt like it would have been cool if the bass voice played an Eb on beat 2 to transition between the E natural and the D.

Changes applied - it does sound cool indeed! Will doubtlessly include that in my next video (the Pianola Roll edition of this fugue, which I'm currently working on).

13 hours ago, PaperComposer said:

I think the pitfall of including so much free counterpoint in your fugue is that the associations between the subject and the surrounding material are lost and everything starts to be perceived as a sort of contrapuntal noodling.  I know you said you included lots of invertible counterpoint but if you don't give the listener space or a melodic hook to let them know they're hearing something familiar then they get buried in the complexity of the incessant counterpoint.  I think the fermatas in the middle of this fugue were a good idea because it gave the ear a much needed break from the incessant contrapuntal rhythms.

Yeah, unfortunately I still haven't been able to avoid the rhythmic contrapunctal barriages I novice always tends to overfill the staves with. I guess that's something I have yet to improve my fugal writing at.

13 hours ago, PaperComposer said:

I think it would have helped considerably if you had a consistent counter-subject in this that was always paired with the subject - it might have given the counterpoint more logic.

I do, however, have to disagree with you there, on this regard differing from your allegation that this fugue lack a consistent countersubject. For one, every instance I could count of episodes and middle entries - let aside the re-exposition - had the subject paired with it's defined countersubject (see the images attached). Moreover, the countersubject only underwent variations of any kind with the subject atop and at the end of its distinctive progression, and in episodes where augmentation was put into practice (see attached images 2 and 3 respectively).

13 hours ago, PaperComposer said:

I do however hear that you stayed very true to the subject and had multiple entries of the subject in many different keys and sometimes even in stretto so good job there. [...] I did hear that you fragmented the subject in the bridge to bring the subject in the 3rd time in G minor again. [...]

Anyway - overall it was an enjoyable fugue!  Thanks for sharing!

1 hour ago, mazeth said:

Impressed by the complexity of the composition, this must have been a lot of work! I agree with Papercomposer on the fact that we sometimes feel "out of breath", as it is really rich and filled with many alterations. Nonetheless, I really appreciated the listening (loved the passage from 1:10-1:20). Would be great to hear in a church though...

Thanks for sharing!

Countless thanks to both of you for reviewing my work! I'm really pleased to see it's somewhat worth it for these purposes.

Happy and prosperous (hopefully) New Year 2021 to you all!

8 hours ago, Nhloki said:

I do, however, have to disagree with you there, on this regard differing from your allegation that this fugue lack a consistent countersubject. For one, every instance I could count of episodes and middle entries - let aside the re-exposition - had the subject paired with it's defined countersubject (see the images attached). Moreover, the countersubject only underwent variations of any kind with the subject atop and at the end of its distinctive progression, and in episodes where augmentation was put into practice (see attached images 2 and 3 respectively).

I stand corrected!  So you do indeed have a consistent counter-subject that you pair with the subject.  I notice also that you try to use hocket to move the counter-subject only when the subject is at rest which is a great method for creating contrapuntal and rhythmic interest.  However the 2nd and 3rd measures of your counter-subject don't do this and I feel like at that point you start to just fill up space.  The counter-subject could have taken a short break there and come in later with some fresh statement that could have been more inspired.  Anyways - that's my take on that.  Thanks for portraying your subjects and counter-subjects for your peers in this way!

Wow, a great work! But I can't fully enjoy it because of the soundquality of the instrument. Could you please present it also with a piano ?

Gerd

19 hours ago, gprengel said:

Wow, a great work! But I can't fully enjoy it because of the soundquality of the instrument. Could you please present it also with a piano ?

Gerd

Original reply: Sadly, given that my audio uploading feature in MuseScore appears to be broken (and I do have tried to fix it priorly) my only possible option for that would be to upload yet another video for the piano version, which I'm unfortunately unable to do since I have already uploaded two videos for this fugue (as usual) and since this fugue is not intended for a piano, but purely for harpsichord (note the lack of dynamic markings). I would gladly upload a the original recording here if this forum supported MP4 video formats in post attachments.

However, now that I think about it, perhaps if I extract the audio from the video recording to MP3, I will able to upload it here! Not for piano though, however I thank you for your request and opinion, Gerd. Hopefully this audio quality (way better than YouTube's in my opinion) will suit you better.