Preambulum in g

Preambulum in g for manualiter.

Written in the north german school. This piece was written in 2014 while I was studying organ at the conservatory. I look trough some old stuff and found it. I did some minor changes to it. 

Please tell me what you think

SimenN

The beginning could have used more repetition of the 1st measure's motive since it was pretty cool. It's a shame it gets thrown out when part B starts in measure 9.

The first fugue has pretty good counterpoint but I'm curious why you chose to keep it so ambiguous since your answer isn't at the 5th (it's in G minor and you start with the dominant instead, then properly cadence to Dm right in the middle of the answer.) I can appreciate the detail of harmonizing it both in D minor and in G minor interchangeably.

The "a tempo" bit in measure 68 onwards is interesting it looks like you're going to do a fugue again but it veers off into a cadence and then it goes again into a fugue-like exposition (and then into a fugue proper.) Same trick as the first, start in D and go into G. I think the main problem I have with this part is that the sequencing is a little too long, but I like this fugue better than the first since it has a little more going for it in terms of variety. It's probably also due to the fact that it's very easy to come up with variations and sequences based on that subject, so that helps.

Maybe the ending also is a little abrupt. You could've done something a little more like the middle episodes on a pedal point or something (like the start) to build up to the ending.

Either way, the counterpoint is mostly top notch, so I can't really say anything about the technical execution. I do miss pedals though, but I know that was not part of the idea. It would've greatly helped give some of the changes more weight, specially supporting the harmonic changes in the fugues.

3 hours ago, SSC said:

The beginning could have used more repetition of the 1st measure's motive since it was pretty cool. It's a shame it gets thrown out when part B starts in measure 9.

The first fugue has pretty good counterpoint but I'm curious why you chose to keep it so ambiguous since your answer isn't at the 5th (it's in G minor and you start with the dominant instead, then properly cadence to Dm right in the middle of the answer.) I can appreciate the detail of harmonizing it both in D minor and in G minor interchangeably.

 

The "a tempo" bit in measure 68 onwards is interesting it looks like you're going to do a fugue again but it veers off into a cadence and then it goes again into a fugue-like exposition (and then into a fugue proper.) Same trick as the first, start in D and go into G. I think the main problem I have with this part is that the sequencing is a little too long, but I like this fugue better than the first since it has a little more going for it in terms of variety. It's probably also due to the fact that it's very easy to come up with variations and sequences based on that subject, so that helps.

 

Maybe the ending also is a little abrupt. You could've done something a little more like the middle episodes on a pedal point or something (like the start) to build up to the ending.

 

Either way, the counterpoint is mostly top notch, so I can't really say anything about the technical execution. I do miss pedals though, but I know that was not part of the idea. It would've greatly helped give some of the changes more weight, specially supporting the harmonic changes in the fugues.

 

 

 

 

Thank you for listening in and giving a detailed review 🙂 

Well, its a very common fugal technique to do this when the subjet goes from 5 - 3 , then the tonal answer will go 4- 3. The 4 is then used as a dominant 7. This is typical for both north german and itialian counterpoint. 

I agree with you one the sequence, i am very much in love with them 😛 That may be why i really like the mid baroque more then the late. 🙂 

Thank you again