Something - A Piece in G Major

Here's a short piece in G major. Hope you enjoy it! And please, don't forget to send in your feedback! (I have tried to contain one idea throughout the piece, since I noticed that a lot of the [absolutely correct] feedback I received was that there was no consistency in my pieces.) 

P.S: Please excuse the horrible dynamics in the beginning. I couldn't figure out how to set that in MuseScore4 (yet!).

Hi @bored_comedy,

The opening is really pentatonic and I love the energy in it! But the fermata after it to transit to next section sounds abrupt for me. The middle section is contemplative and you should extend it more. I especially like the thick chords in b.14-16 since it's static in contrast with the opening! I like your transition of bring the life back from b.24-35, but the transition is even longer than the middle section, so that's the second reason why I think you should extend the middle section! The last section is basically a repetition of the first section other than having modulated to C major. You can probably cancel the "in G major" in your title if you have the entire section on C major and ends on it, but I think a return to G major at the end will provide a great effect and climax to the piece with the C major as a false recapitulation/reprise in subdominant, a cozier key.

In b.26 & 27 do you miss the staccatos for the left hand or it's that your intention? Also the notation in b.34 & 35 for the left hand is quite shocking for me🤪! You can probably put the harmony to the right hand and alternate with a double G in the bass with a semiquaver rest!

Thanks for sharing!

Henry

Hey man

Pretty cool music here, I really like that you took the feedback given to you with previous pieces and tried applying it to this one. That's how you grow and improve. Not that everyone is right ALL the time, but there's some wise words that float around in this forum, so I'm glad you took it to heart. 

I like the pentatonic vibes with this, I'm a sucker for them I suppose. I watch some of the playability of how you notated some notes (designate bar 34 left hand notes with where you want the right hand to start playing), and watch some of the spacing at times. I'm no musescore expert, but surely there's a way to space your music to make it more readable (bar 35). 

It did still seem a little all over at times, but I could hear how you tried blending ideas together. Maybe something you could explore is to have more defined themes, as in shorter motifs to really test your chops as far as what you can enhance with your compositional toolkit. Another thing you could do, especially if you prefer a longer melody like this piece, is to really study up on how composers have used cadences and symmetry in their melodies. Chopin and Mozart come to mind in studying this.

The harmony was a little too tonic heavy, but I did like the variations in your music. Again, I'd study up on all the tried and true ways of using chords in a scale, most notably the 4 and 5 chords, and then maybe branch out from there. 

Great effort, and solid work here. Keep composing, I'd love to hear how you continue to improve!

Interesting piece. I find it a bit "progressive": many ideas going forward. It's a short piece and a good plan of what you want is a plus.

Some chords in the low register are too thick or are in the "dangerous" limits of the muddy sound. I think some quieter parts (bars 16-23) would sound better with thinner chords. The change of the two voices to the upper octave at the same time (b. 32) is abrupt (unprepared)

Sorry, but the piano is much more delicate than we think and, you know, it took me years to write better for it (and the road is long...)

Nice piece though its title is unfortunately taken by some dude, George Harrison I think...

On a more serious note, there are some overlaps and other minor scoring errors you are probably aware of like M35, also mentioned by Thatguy:

Notice how you use cross-staff notation on M35 but not in M34 where it would be convenient and likely more idiomatic as well. If you want someone to play this, the exact metronome markings changing each bar (which I presume they want to mimic an accel.) are playable but not very recommended from my experience, specially if you don't want abrupt changes in tempo but accel./rit. and variations of them.

Now regarding consistency: probably you already do this but in case you don't, thinking about the inner structure of the piece is always useful even if you don't abide to a strict one. In this case I would say you have a set of 3-4 ideas which (and of course this is just my opinion based on my own experience composing, playing, listening and receiving feedback):

♫ Do not interact with each another enough, and thus the complete work looks more like a set of small separated themes than a unified "something".
♫ Are presented but not developed enough nor repeated (except one, but only at the very end), plus the piece doesn't seem to give much more prominence to one over the rest till the end of it, resulting in an amplification of the feeling of being listening to a set of different themes instead of blah blah blah.
♫ There is little to no relation between the ideas presented, which is not necessarily bad —you may consciously want two separated ideas fighting for prominence or even more complicated combinations— unless points 1 and 2 be present in the piece, which in my opinion they are.

So in my opinion you do have the idea there and you are on the right way, the only thing you need to keep doing is composing. Hope some of my and/or the guys' above feedback will be of use to you.

Kind regards,
Daniel–Ømicrón.