.

 .

Im really liking the overall sound of this piece! I think your overall harmonic construction for this piece sounds really great throughout and I like the melodies that you wrote over the accompaniment. I think one thing that this piece could benefit from would be a contrasting section! Maybe a slower section to contrast to the fast part throughout. Something with a different texture to the left hand ostinanto and fast right hand texture. But overall I think this piece sounds good and I really like the energy of it! Very classical in feel! Thanks for sharing!

On 7/23/2023 at 9:16 PM, Guardian25 said:

.

.

Kia Ora,

Right of the bat, this a very lovely piece that you've written. A few caveats:

• The fast semiquaver alberti bass accompaniment get a bit boring about a minute into the piece. I would recommend in the future trying to vary the accompinament in order to sustain interest.
• I agree with Guardian, a contrasting section would really lift this piece up. Perhaps a slower, lyrical trio? Or a dancy bit?
• I would definitely start to add dynamics into your pieces. This piece would be really amplified if it had dynamics in it. 

All in all, a convincing and fun little piece.

Nga Mihi,

Arjuna

Hey Aaron,

I am happy that you're trying the minor key and also developing your material! I have lots of observations and hope you don't find me nitpicky! 🙂

-B.5 (and similar places) maybe a B-C semiquaver instead of a C quaver will imply the dominant chord more clearly.

-I love your modulation to C major in the first section, clearly you have taken @chopin's advice in your last post!

-I think the caesura in b.20 slightly weird in that place, since it stops the flow suddenly and it's not cadential at all. Maybe you can just have the semiquaver flow keeps going, or have a half cadence there.

-The LH figuration in b.22-23 can be counted as parallel fifth. You can have the first chord of b.23 in ii6 (D minor first inversion) first to prevent it.

-B.33 can be in V/of C and it allows the harmony to go smoother will a V/G after it.

-B.39 maybe you miss the F# for the first F in RH?

-I think maybe you miss the F# for b.43-44? It results in a clash of F natural and F#.

-I think in b.51 you can add D# to the Ds to imply the dominant of E minor which follows it.

-B.53 and 56-59 the RH part can be written on a treble clef as the notes aren't really that low to be in bass clef.

-For b.58 you can have C# and D# for a chromatic minor ascending scale for the RH melody.

-In b.60 adding G#s to the G naturals will help us identify the dominant of A minor follows it! Also there's a parallel 5th with the G-B-D chord and A-C-E chord after it. Changing the first chord to G#-B-E will help!

-Using the ascending melodic minor scale in b.70-71. that is adding a F# to it may help the melody sounds more melodious!

-For the last bar if you write a D for top note, it should be resolved to a C for a ^4-^3 progression. Or you can use E-G#-B there for a firmer ending.

I also agree with what @Guardian25 and Arjuna @expert21 have said.

Thx for sharing your piece!

Henry

Since they have done some great reviews I'm just going to give you some general impressions.

I think the piece is very well done in terms of structure, melody, modulations.

What I see are two general aspects:

1.) The bass Alberti...., it has already been commented. I don't think the classics would use it in a whole piece. In fact it is common to see them start with it and abandon it soon to give way to other patterns. I understand that doing an Alberti bass all the time is an easier solution than writing and looking for a more varied left hand. But so much of this kind of bass is monotonous and sounds like a hybrid between classicism and Steve Reich.

2.) I think there is a bit of a mess with minor scales. You know, natural minor, harmonic, and melodic. There are times when, as    @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu pointed out, the VI degree is ascended and not the VII, or vice versa, etc... And those augmented second leaps, for example F -G# are not what you would expect in this style. That's why sometimes it sounds a bit "flamenco".

 

Sorry I'm a little late to this one. A lovely little piece you composed here(especially since you were basically living 18th century when you wrote this). As many others have mentioned, the piece does get a little bit mundane after a while. A little trio section might help(with varying texture and key), as well melodic variation here and there(you could sometimes break up the three note motif using dotted eights unless you really want consistency). Lastly, plan out your modulations a bit more so they sound coherent(elaborate more on m. 34 so that we can fully capture the shift to G major). Again, a change in texture might help. I am actually a fan of the harmonic minor since it gives your work a bit of an individual touch(perhaps influenced by scarlatti?). Anyways, I wouldn't be able to come up with anything half this good if there was an outage.(probably be hiding under my parent's bed)

Keep it up.