Two shorts preludes (Romanticism)

Hi, i'm new in this forum and i don't understand how it works really well haha, also, i'm not an english native speaker so don't mind any grammar error.

Those preludes are my firsts compos itions. The second prelude's interpretation is really awful lmao, both were made by a computer software.

Btw, thos are interpretations made by musescore

I like very much the contrasting harmony of the second part (in the first piece). D-B7-G6-Gm6-D-D+7-G/D etc... I think it's something like that.

There's no sound for the second one !

I didn't played it, it was all a computer software but i didn't like its interpretation

Hi @Samuel_vangogh,

That's for sure really nice first compositions. As Luis noted, the harmony is great in the first one. Good use of the low bass for the forte section. I would suggest to tidy up the fermatas in bar 7 since it will be quite confusing.

I love the second one even better. The harmony is even more advanced e.g. the usage of French sixth in b. 16, and I love the flow in it. The modulation is great as well as it stretches as far to A minor. I love the piu mosso section, the climax is very well built.

4 hours ago, Samuel_vangogh said:

I didn't played it, it was all a computer software but i didn't like its interpretation

I think you can try to play them! They don't seem really difficult for me.

Great job! Thanks for sharing and joining the forum. There are lots of talented young composers here and you can review their pieces as well!! You may get more responses if you review other composers' works!!

Henry

On 1/9/2023 at 7:44 PM, Samuel_vangogh said:

Hi, i'm new in this forum and i don't understand how it works really well haha

Whatever you doubt just ask us in PM or in the chat, people here will surely be glad to help you in case they have time. Welcome to the forums! Let's dive into your pieces...

• I: It seems very approachable. Are you a pianist? My only criticism here:

1. The end is perhaps too sober to my taste (but this is just my humble opinion so don't worry much)
2. As a suggestion, I would make the 2nd volta starting from piano instead of mezzopiano. I think it might sound better performed by a real pianist (musescore isn't capable of doing that as far as I know).
    

• II: Much better, almost breathtaking at certain moments, honestly.

1. The accel. and rall. are very very nicely placed.
2. The end is well prepared and executed.
3. Melodic motives, though kept simple and not very developed, are convincing and beautiful in my opinion, plus for this piece duration you didn't need much more development, otherwise it might have been "too much content". 
4. The arpeggiated chords are not boring, which is not super common.
5. Dynamics, which were not lacking in the first piece, make the difference in this second one.
6. This piece is a bit more demanding, but it says much more.

   The only "negative" points I would give would be:

1. Regarding the engraving:  these 8va altas, while not wrong at all, may be idiomatically strange from my experience. One normally goes for something like one of these two:   My question here would be: do you intend the pianist to play the higher C with the left hand, with the right hand, or whatever he find more comfortable?
2. If I had to point the "weakest" part of this piece I would say it's the transition from the accelerando back to the first idea, measures 54-57 to be more precise. It didn't convince me but it's not bad at all anyway.
   

Congratulations, it was a pleasure to listen to these digital interpretations of your pieces. Hope you keep publishing your compositions here!

Kind regards,
Daniel–Ømicrón.

16 hours ago, Omicronrg9 said:

Whatever you doubt just ask us in PM or in the chat, people here will surely be glad to help you in case they have time. Welcome to the forums! Let's dive into your pieces...

• I: It seems very approachable. Are you a pianist? My only criticism here:

1. The end is perhaps too sober to my taste (but this is just my humble opinion so don't worry much)
2. As a suggestion, I would make the 2nd volta starting from piano instead of mezzopiano. I think it might sound better performed by a real pianist (musescore isn't capable of doing that as far as I know).
    

• II: Much better, almost breathtaking at certain moments, honestly.

1. The accel. and rall. are very very nicely placed.
2. The end is well prepared and executed.
3. Melodic motives, though kept simple and not very developed, are convincing and beautiful in my opinion, plus for this piece duration you didn't need much more development, otherwise it might have been "too much content". 
4. The arpeggiated chords are not boring, which is not super common.
5. Dynamics, which were not lacking in the first piece, make the difference in this second one.
6. This piece is a bit more demanding, but it says much more.

   The only "negative" points I would give would be:

1. Regarding the engraving:  these 8va altas, while not wrong at all, may be idiomatically strange from my experience. One normally goes for something like one of these two:   My question here would be: do you intend the pianist to play the higher C with the left hand, with the right hand, or whatever he find more comfortable?
2. If I had to point the "weakest" part of this piece I would say it's the transition from the accelerando back to the first idea, measures 54-57 to be more precise. It didn't convince me but it's not bad at all anyway.

Congratulations, it was a pleasure to listen to these digital interpretations of your pieces. Hope you keep publishing your compositions here!

Kind regards,
Daniel–Ømicrón.

 

Thank you for your comment!😭, I really apreciate that. I'm not a pianist, my main instrument is viola haha. In the reexposure I though that the pianist should find the most confortable way but I struggled writing that part because I wanted to do the same hand movement but I didn't find a better option.