louis
New Member
Posts: 6
|
Post by louis on Oct 28, 2021 0:50:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Oct 28, 2021 16:47:53 GMT
Listened to this several times. You have a lot of interesting ideas in it that I enjoyed listening to. But I had some trouble parsing the form.
For instance, mm.49-68 are clearly an episode in the subdominant (though it's not clear why you put the double bars at the end of m.50, in the middle of a passage), but the structure of the initial section (mm.1-48) is less clear. It took me several listens and following along the score to identify m.17 as potentially the start of an episode after the initial statement of the theme. But whether it's an episode or a variation of the theme or development thereof, is somewhat unclear until I took a closer look at the score and realized that the initial theme returns in the LH in mm.33-48.
So we're looking at an ABACA rondo form. Given that C differs in both key and accompaniment, but B remains in the same key and similar accompaniment style, C stands out much more than B, and makes B sound like an extended part of A rather than an episode on equal footing with C. I'd suggest transposing B to a different key -- maybe the dominant, since C is in the subdominant, so it would provide a nice aesthetic symmetry, perhaps flanked by short modulatory bridges. Or maybe modulatory bridges are not necessary; depending on how you work it in, you might be able to get away with just jumping into the dominant cold turkey and it would provide the needed contrast between A and B. The return of the main theme in m.33 would flow spontaneously from the dominant key as an implied cadence.
On a smaller note, the harmony in m.24 sounds a bit wonky. You have a sus2_4 chord with D in the bass, but the D doesn't resolve on the next beat but slides up chromatically to D#, reaching E only on beat 3. Then it proceeds to E# as the RH delicately sidesteps E/E#, but then this E# is not resolved in the bass but in the RH. So overall, the voice leading here seems a bit awkward.
|
|
louis
New Member
Posts: 6
|
Post by louis on Oct 28, 2021 17:45:27 GMT
Listened to this several times. You have a lot of interesting ideas in it that I enjoyed listening to. But I had some trouble parsing the form. For instance, mm.49-68 are clearly an episode in the subdominant (though it's not clear why you put the double bars at the end of m.50, in the middle of a passage), but the structure of the initial section (mm.1-48) is less clear. It took me several listens and following along the score to identify m.17 as potentially the start of an episode after the initial statement of the theme. But whether it's an episode or a variation of the theme or development thereof, is somewhat unclear until I took a closer look at the score and realized that the initial theme returns in the LH in mm.33-48. So we're looking at an ABACA rondo form. Given that C differs in both key and accompaniment, but B remains in the same key and similar accompaniment style, C stands out much more than B, and makes B sound like an extended part of A rather than an episode on equal footing with C. I'd suggest transposing B to a different key -- maybe the dominant, since C is in the subdominant, so it would provide a nice aesthetic symmetry, perhaps flanked by short modulatory bridges. Or maybe modulatory bridges are not necessary; depending on how you work it in, you might be able to get away with just jumping into the dominant cold turkey and it would provide the needed contrast between A and B. The return of the main theme in m.33 would flow spontaneously from the dominant key as an implied cadence. On a smaller note, the harmony in m.24 sounds a bit wonky. You have a sus2_4 chord with D in the bass, but the D doesn't resolve on the next beat but slides up chromatically to D#, reaching E only on beat 3. Then it proceeds to E# as the RH delicately sidesteps E/E#, but then this E# is not resolved in the bass but in the RH. So overall, the voice leading here seems a bit awkward. Hello fuguestate, Thanks once again. I am glad that you could identify the rondo form and your suggestions on modulating the B section is real helpful Once I update the piece I will add it to the thread. About the harmony in m.24, if I resolve the bass to the F# it would double with the 3rd but do you see this as a particular problem? Louis
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Oct 28, 2021 19:44:04 GMT
Hmm, doubling on the 3rd generally should be avoided esp. when there are only two voices at play. I wonder if you could replace the E# with something else; that may give you some wiggle room to do something else that avoids the awkwardness without needing to double the 3rd. Just throwing out some ideas here.
|
|