Sonata No. 6 in D For Violin or Flute, Cello, and Keyboard

Hello! This is my first sonata for piano trio in a major key. Took me one month to write. I tried to give more emphasis to the violin part that can also be played by flute, and the cello part is a bit less developed. The keyboard part can be played on piano or harpsichord (of course, without dynamics on harpsichord). I tried to maintain a classical style but with some liberties.

I. Allegro (sonata form)

II. Largo (ternary form) (A major)

III. Minuet (and trio) (A major)

IV. Rondo (sonata-rondo form)

Looking for feedback!

Score video (violin and piano): 

sonata.pdf

FIRST MOVEMENT

I prefer the version with the flute. But I think it is because of the sound of the libraries. Also, it is more pleasant (to me) the harpsichord than the piano when the background is made by alberti bass or repeated notes. I like very much the part where the harmony changes a lot (m 16...)

The second parta is beautiful nd makes a great contrast, and is when the piano has its best moments.

II. LARGO

Flute version. I love this part. I like also when the harpsichord goes alone... The flute sounds a bit obscuro and low perhaps is the register.

III MINUET

This is also lovey and well done. I observe you don't take use of the perfect authentic cadence in the final part of sections, which is almos "mandatory" in this style. See m. 7-8,  or 23-24, or 50-51. The bass is OK_ 5-1, but the melody is 2-1. That is an imperfect cadence. It's OK but they are weaker and what is expected, at least at the very end is a Perfect Authentic Cadence.

IV RONDO

This is also great although some cadences still sound odd to me ( form example m. 48-49).

Huge work!

1 hour ago, Luis Hernández said:

FIRST MOVEMENT

I prefer the version with the flute. But I thin it is because of the sound of the libraries. Also, it is more pleasant (to me) the harpsichord than the piano when the background is made by alberti bass or repeated notes. I like very much the part where the harmony changes a lot (m 16...)

The second parta is beautiful nd makes a great contrast, and is when the piano has its best moments.

 

II. LARGO

Flute version. I love this part. I like also when the harpsichord goes alone... The flute sounds a bit obscuro and low perhaps is the register.

 

III MINUET

This is also lovey and well done. I observe you don't take use of the perfect authentic cadence in the final part of sections, which is almos "mandatory" in this style. See m. 7-8,  or 23-24, or 50-51. The bass is OK_ 5-1, but the melody is 2-1. That is an imperfect cadence. It's OK but they are weaker and what is expected, at least at the very end is a Perfect Authentic Cadence.

 

IV RONDO

This is also great although some cadences still sound odd to me ( form example m. 48-49).

 

 

Huge work!

 

Thanks! Didn't know that stuff about perfect cadences in every section ending. I'll be sure to pay attention in my next compositions

First Mov:

I like this movement! Very enjoyable with a trio sonata setting I can say. 

I think the harmony a little bit adventurous for this style but completely fine for me. I see between most sections it's linked by cadence, which will stop the flow abruptly. Personally I think you can add some fillups to bridge the sections more! Between b.42 to 43 I find the progression from C sharp minor cadence and travel back immediately to D major too abrupt for me. I would probably add thw A major chord as the bridge.

I think adding tenuto to harpsichord quite strange since it's will be non legato anyway. But for piano it will be fine! Though I agree with Luis that I enjoy flue and harpsichord more!

2nd Mov:

I love this movement! I love the minore section more! I find the some notes are missing in the minore section though.

3rd Mov:

Yes the plagal cadence ending is strange for this style. Apart from this I enjoy this!

4th Mov:

I enjoy this movement most actually! Very nice harmonic progression in the C section.

I think the scoring quite weird though, since the "coda" section is not a coda at all but later parts of the rondo. You should just write out the first section after the B section after b.34.

The real coda is great for me since I love its buildup!

Thanks so much for your sharing! Please considering posting more frequently here!

Henry

Hi! Thank you for sharing your work here first of all. Let's dive into it. I haven't read Luis' and Henry's replies so sorry if I repeat something they say —I might just read them before posting this anyway—.

♫ First movement:

• The sections that goes after the exposition of the first motives, as well as the question-answer structure thereafter is very enjoyable. I was not convinced with the beginning, but seeing how it gets connected with the aforementioned passages it did, even more after the contrasting sections after near M86 (if I'm not mistaken). The instruments blend and interact nicely with each other, having their space (like the small piano solo chunk at the measure mentioned above) and don't "eating" or overshadowing one another. 

• I found the ending a bit disappointing, but that's just a subjective consideration, there's nothing wrong with it. If I had to guess I'd say it didn't convince me because the phrase or couple of phrases that you present at the beginning and that you manage to repeat thrice with nice and cohesive connections with the rest of the material (again, if I'm not mistaken) eventually got much power and I did not feel that the ending you offered solved it all. However, that may even make sense since we're not even past half the sonata. Let's see what the next movement says.

♫ Second movement:

• For some reason, the playback in the YouTube video does not accurately play the second measure (flute/violin part). I heard it as if it were a single note instead of three, but perhaps it's just on my end. It happens every time the video reaches this figure:  Plus, here the violin sample is behaving strangely.

• Now actually talking about the music, the minor part is solid, and the major part is good enough (to my taste, at least). I would say I liked the first movement more.

♫ Third movement: 

• Why despite noticing evident dynamic changes in this movement (when modulating to A minor for example) there's no dynamic marking? 5 bars before the first piano, the first voice shuts down (in the video), almost disappearing. The transition at M51 didn't convince me much either.

• The "Major" motive is strong, beautiful and simple, yet I still prefer the way you developed the first movement.

• Should all movements be played attacca? For the III -> IV I'd say a pause would be very welcome.

♫ Fourth movement:

• Nice, my only criticism here would be again, transitions; more specifically, the first one that goes back to the ritornello, since the next one is much more fluent and the "C" section itself convinces me much more than the B one. The D section is very beautiful. 

• Got mixed feelings with the end. On one hand, you were building lots of tension since M128, but this didn't last enough in my opinion since you solved that tension before the end of the piece, and thus subtracted that tension at the wrong time in my opinion, leaving the sonata with a final which I wouldn't call anticlimactic but "lacking" and definitely not as wholesome as it could have been —yet beautiful, anyway—.

Again, thank you for sharing this work here, for it is always enjoyable to listen to a hard-working piece with at least 1/10 of the care the composer, in this case, you, put it when and while making it.

Kind regards,
Daniel–Ømicrón.

8 hours ago, Henry Ng Tsz Kiu said:

First Mov:

I like this movement! Very enjoyable with a trio sonata setting I can say. 

I think the harmony a little bit adventurous for this style but completely fine for me. I see between most sections it's linked by cadence, which will stop the flow abruptly. Personally I think you can add some fillups to bridge the sections more! Between b.42 to 43 I find the progression from C sharp minor cadence and travel back immediately to D major too abrupt for me. I would probably add thw A major chord as the bridge.

I think adding tenuto to harpsichord quite strange since it's will be non legato anyway. But for piano it will be fine! Though I agree with Luis that I enjoy flue and harpsichord more!

2nd Mov:

I love this movement! I love the minore section more! I find the some notes are missing in the minore section though.

3rd Mov:

Yes the plagal cadence ending is strange for this style. Apart from this I enjoy this!

4th Mov:

I enjoy this movement most actually! Very nice harmonic progression in the C section.

I think the scoring quite weird though, since the "coda" section is not a coda at all but later parts of the rondo. You should just write out the first section after the B section after b.34.

The real coda is great for me since I love its buildup!

Thanks so much for your sharing! Please considering posting more frequently here!

Henry

 

I just used the coda as a scoring tool, without actual correlation with the structre of the movement. It makes sense I should use the coda only with the coda section (duh). Thanks for pointing it out and for the other observations!

8 hours ago, Omicronrg9 said:

Hi! Thank you for sharing your work here first of all. Let's dive into it. I haven't read Luis' and Henry's replies so sorry if I repeat something they say —I might just read them before posting this anyway—.

♫ First movement:

• The sections that goes after the exposition of the first motives, as well as the question-answer structure thereafter is very enjoyable. I was not convinced with the beginning, but seeing how it gets connected with the aforementioned passages it did, even more after the contrasting sections after near M86 (if I'm not mistaken). The instruments blend and interact nicely with each other, having their space (like the small piano solo chunk at the measure mentioned above) and don't "eating" or overshadowing one another. 

• I found the ending a bit disappointing, but that's just a subjective consideration, there's nothing wrong with it. If I had to guess I'd say it didn't convince me because the phrase or couple of phrases that you present at the beginning and that you manage to repeat thrice with nice and cohesive connections with the rest of the material (again, if I'm not mistaken) eventually got much power and I did not feel that the ending you offered solved it all. However, that may even make sense since we're not even past half the sonata. Let's see what the next movement says.

♫ Second movement:

• For some reason, the playback in the YouTube video does not accurately play the second measure (flute/violin part). I heard it as if it were a single note instead of three, but perhaps it's just on my end. It happens every time the video reaches this figure:  Plus, here the violin sample is behaving strangely.

• Now actually talking about the music, the minor part is solid, and the major part is good enough (to my taste, at least). I would say I liked the first movement more.

♫ Third movement: 

• Why despite noticing evident dynamic changes in this movement (when modulating to A minor for example) there's no dynamic marking? 5 bars before the first piano, the first voice shuts down (in the video), almost disappearing. The transition at M51 didn't convince me much either.

• The "Major" motive is strong, beautiful and simple, yet I still prefer the way you developed the first movement.

• Should all movements be played attacca? For the III -> IV I'd say a pause would be very welcome.

♫ Fourth movement:

• Nice, my only criticism here would be again, transitions; more specifically, the first one that goes back to the ritornello, since the next one is much more fluent and the "C" section itself convinces me much more than the B one. The D section is very beautiful. 

• Got mixed feelings with the end. On one hand, you were building lots of tension since M128, but this didn't last enough in my opinion since you solved that tension before the end of the piece, and thus subtracted that tension at the wrong time in my opinion, leaving the sonata with a final which I wouldn't call anticlimactic but "lacking" and definitely not as wholesome as it could have been —yet beautiful, anyway—.

Again, thank you for sharing this work here, for it is always enjoyable to listen to a hard-working piece with at least 1/10 of the care the composer, in this case, you, put it when and while making it.

Kind regards,
Daniel–Ømicrón.

 

Hi! Musescore has many weird playback problems so the suddent jump from mvt. III to IV and the thing with the violin in the second movement and the third movement where it suddenly disappears wasn't supposed to happen. Anyways, I'm not too worried with it because my works are written for real players not a program, so this isn't supposed to be an actual performance.

Your thoughts are very interesting particularly the part about solving the tension too early in the ending. I will experiment with keeping it longer in my next sonata.

Thank you!