(Again)Piano piece

[jonslaughter]

My finished piece and a midi rendition:

https://www.jonslaughter.com/files/Diaphanous.pdf
https://www.jonslaughter.com/files/Diaphanous.mp3

Please post any comments and suggestions and such.

Thanks,
Jon

[jonslaughter]

why 28 views but no replies? Does it suck that bad?

[dnephi]

I don't have sound on this comp, but as it is, try putting sf or accents on the notes you want Forte or use crescendo bars instead of marking a lot of fs and ps etc.

Hey you might like this: https://www.music.columbia.edu/~chris/ctrpnt.html

A whole book on it: https://www.musique.umontreal.ca/personnel/Belkin/bk/index.html

[phil13]

It doesn't suck, Jon. It's just not incredibly interesting at this point. All composers go through this phase.

The mp3 didn't work on my comp, but I did print it out and sight-read it. I even played through it a few times. Basically, you are using the same four chords throughout the f-minor section: Fm, C, Ab, and Eb. The melody has potential for much more interesting chord changes and could be varied a bit throughout the piece.

Is this your first composition? I remember when I began writing, my pieces were WAY worse than this. I basically copied sections literally out of other works note-for-note. Then, I went through a period where my works were so bombastic you just could not listen to them. Then, they used the same chords over and over again, producing a bland harmony. It took me about six months before I produced anything really worth keeping without revision.

My advice: Study the works of Chopin for how to make melodies more flowing and interesting, and study the turn-of-the-century Russians (Rachmaninoff, Scriabin, Medtner) for more unusual and interesting chord progessions.

Phil

[jonslaughter]

I don't have sound on this comp, but as it is, try putting sf or accents on the notes you want Forte or use crescendo bars instead of marking a lot of fs and ps etc.

But sf and accents apply only to the notes they occur with. I want those dynamics to be applied to the whole time until the next dynamics occur. i.e., when I use f on half a beat I want it to occur for that whole half beat.  If I just put an sf then it will apply sf to that note while the others take on the original dynamics? ;/

[jonslaughter]

It doesn't suck, Jon. It's just not incredibly interesting at this point. All composers go through this phase.

The mp3 didn't work on my comp, but I did print it out and sight-read it. I even played through it a few times. Basically, you are using the same four chords throughout the f-minor section: Fm, C, Ab, and Eb. The melody has potential for much more interesting chord changes and could be varied a bit throughout the piece.

Look at Beethovens first section of his pathetique sonata mov. 2. his chords are very simple(although ofcourse mine are more simple). Look at the endings to most of his symphonies or even the beginning of his 5th. Most are just dominant and tonic progressions.  I'm not saying the harmonies are not simple but just that simple is sometimes good(specially when your just trying to make music).


Yes, but lots of music use just those chords. some music uses just lots of I and V for long sections of the music.  I was trying to get away from modulating to much or using "strange" chords because when I do that it tends to sound really bad.  I tend to try to modulate to the remotest of keys and not do a good job.

Is this your first composition? I remember when I began writing, my pieces were WAY worse than this. I basically copied sections literally out of other works note-for-note. Then, I went through a period where my works were so bombastic you just could not listen to them. Then, they used the same chords over and over again, producing a bland harmony. It took me about six months before I produced anything really worth keeping without revision.

Yes, it is my first complete piece.  I have done little things for practice but this is the first thing that sounds musical and tried to study some stuff out of the theory books but every time I try to write a piece by the "numbers"(i.e., by theory) it sounds much much worse. My goal here was not so much bout harmony and voice leading as it was about musical ideas.  I think harmony is the result of ideas and not the growth of it. i.e., you don't start out saying I'm going to write a progression of the form I - V - vi - V/ii - V/V - V for the first phrase. Why? Cause every time I did that it sounded like total crap.  I know I could have used more interested harmonies but I think they are ok for it being a simple piece and did not want to get distracted in trying to make it the best piece in the world. 

My advice: Study the works of Chopin for how to make melodies more flowing and interesting, and study the turn-of-the-century Russians (Rachmaninoff, Scriabin, Medtner) for more unusual and interesting chord progessions.

Personally I don't like Chopin all that much(but ofcourse that doesn't mean I can't learn from him).  Usually Chopins music sounds dull to me(in some sense flashy but no content).  Although there are some pieces that I really love from him but I'm more interested in Beethoven(and a little of Mozart and Bach).  The later composers that you mentioned do not really float my boat.  There harmonies and melodies don't seem to make much sense to me. Although theres always a good song or two from them I just tend to avoid them. (in some sense I feel music as taken a step backwards after Beethoven). I do like Mendelssohn though.

So I'm not sure why you say its boring. Is it simply because I'm not using a more diverse harmonic basis? If so, it was intentional. I still have not mastered harmony and how to modulate smoothly to remote keys. I do know a lot of the theory about it but I have trouble making it musical. i.e., since it was my first piece I just wanted to get something musical and not necessarily try and make it a great piece.  My next piece, ofcourse, would be more diverse in its harmony as I would probably use more remote keys and tones... but only a little.  I just didn't want to try and make the harmony more complex just so it looked more pro. Eventually I might get to the point where I can include them easier but I don't think I'm read yet.

Thanks,
Jon

[phil13]

As it is your first complete composition, I would say that harmonic changes will seem easier to use as you compose more and more, but not at this moment. I composed in the sort of Haydnesque, Beethovenesque style as well with fairly successful works. Granted, I look back on them now as inferior to what I compose at this time, but it was what I wanted in that moment.

Thus, the actual fact that the chords are simple is not the problem. What I actually mean, Jon, is that it seems bland because the piece doesn't build tension or resolve it. That is what made Bach and Beethoven so successful even without complex harmony- they were masters at manipulating other aspects of music- texture, melody, rhythm, and form- to create a work that caused tension and then resolved that tension.

Now, my original response about harmonic complexity I admit was a bit much, but it was my initial reaction because I like to build and resolve tension through harmonic complexity. You obviously do not, so learn to change other things, like rhythm and melody, to heighten the drama in a piece. (You will find, if you look closely, that almost every successful piece ever written throughout history has this key point of tension and resolution in common.)

Phil

[dnephi]

If we are on the subject of examining and studying repertoire:
"For us musicians, Beethoven's work is the pillar of cloud and fire which guided the Israelites through the desert- a pillar of cloud to guide us by day, a pillar of fire to guide us by night, so that we may progress both day and night" His italics.

Now here were some works and what I would look for in these works:

Theme construction: Schubert Lieder, Beethoven, Chopin Sonata

Harmonic construction along with theme:
Liszt TEs, Beethoven, Rachmaninoff concerti, Schubert sonatas, Scriabin.  Tchaikovsky especially-his harmonic control is incredible (orchestral works as well! They are very influential).

Textures (IE vocabulary):
Alkan Symphony & Concerto, Festin.  Chopin Etudes, Liszt Etudes, Scriabin Etudes.  Also, orchestral works, such as Wagner (!), Tchaikovsky, Mahler.  The orchestral idiom was highly influential on the style of Liszt and Scriabin.

Fugal/imitative development:
Bach Fugues, Art of the Fugue

Thematic Transformation:
Brahms Miniatures, Liszt, Cesar Franck, Beethoven.

Variation development: Brahms miniatures, variations serieuses, Bach-Busoni Chaconne, Rachmaninoff Rhapsody, Beethoven 32 variations in C Minor, Eroica variations, Brahms Handel and Paganini Variations.

Counterpoint: Godowsky Passacaglia, Brahms, Beethvoen, Mozart.  Use the guide above.

Large-scale structure: Brahms large works, Beethoven Large Works, Liszt Large Works, Other symphony, Brahms Chamber Music.

Variations for effects:
Experiments in impressionistic effects,  ie Liszt Harmonies du soir
Stretching form or surprising the audience when they expect something different
Dramatically change harmonic progression upon variation or repetition

Orchestral textures fitted to the piano: As above.

Motivic development: Liszt Sonata, Beethoven, Chopin B-flat minor sonata (Note that here Chopin succeeds, once again, in forming a cohesive whole out of seemingly jaunty or rough parts.

Further suggestions/areas?

I have, personally, decided to do this: work on series of different pieces as practice, and when comfortable, right 24 characteristic pieces of various characters, one in each key.  These would be preludes .  Then after that, some further works, eventually building up to a Sonatine A la Haydn, then a Sonata A la Haydn then Sonata a Early Beethoven.  After that, I plan to make two sets of 12 Etudes, one being simple etudes to explore the keyboard and possible innovations and expansions and resources, as well as a testing ground for harmonic development.  Then, a large set of 12 Etudes, further exploring all aspects of piano composition and being of great musical value.  These finally would culminate in the ultimate creation, the Grande Sonate (Don't know what language it'd be in lol.)   I plan for it to have the sheer power of grandiose works, yet the structural and musical integrity and form and intensity of emotion therein of Brahms, or to create the most moving and powerful work that I could possibly create.*  Now, to phil, note that a lot of Scriabin's chord progressions were chromatic variations or augmentations of the standard chord progression, suggesting further area of exploration.

*P.S. Borodin was a doctor and was what he described a "weekend" composer.

I hope I don't kill you with fright. 

[phil13]

I have, personally, decided to do this: work on series of different pieces as practice, and when comfortable, right 24 characteristic pieces of various characters, one in each key.  These would be preludes .  Then after that, some further works, eventually building up to a Sonatine A la Haydn, then a Sonata A la Haydn then Sonata a Early Beethoven. After that, I plan to make two sets of 12 Etudes, one being simple etudes to explore the keyboard and possible innovations and expansions and resources, as well as a testing ground for harmonic development. Then, a large set of 12 Etudes, further exploring all aspects of piano composition and being of great musical value. These finally would culminate in the ultimate creation, the Grande Sonate (Don't know what language it'd be in lol.) I plan for it to have the sheer power of grandiose works, yet the structural and musical integrity and form and intensity of emotion therein of Brahms, or to create the most moving and powerful work that I could possibly create.

Personally, I believe that choosing the form first is bad luck. All of my finished or current works began with a harmonic, melodic, or rhythmic idea, and then progressed from there, becoming a form as needed (non-solo works included):

finished:

Polonaise in C# minor
Variations on an Arietta in G minor
Dance in C# minor (string quartet)
Sonata in B minor (cello and piano)
Piano Concerto in F minor (piano and orch.)
Romance in A major (piano and orch.)
Sonata in D minor (violin and piano)
Etude in C Lydian Dominant

and unfinished:

Fugue in D minor
Nocturne in E minor
Nocturne in C# major

You see? There isn't any real 'development plan' progressing from piece to piece, and every time I try to write such things (a set of preludes, a full piano sonata) the endeavor usually fails. I just write what comes to my mind at the moment, and the nature of the idea usually creates the form in itself.

Then again, everybody writes differently. Perhaps you will find it easier to work under a specific form than me. Good luck with your attempt!

Phil

[dnephi]

Brahms found his creativity soar when put under restrictions that would have strangled most other men, and personally, I personally think that I am more of the intellectual constructor than, say, Schumann, who wrote from his genius alone. 

Schumann was the greater genius, but Brahms' strength was with his unconquerable control of form and structure.  (paraphrased from "The Literature of the Piano," by Ernest Hutcheson.)

[jonslaughter]

Now, my original response about harmonic complexity I admit was a bit much, but it was my initial reaction because I like to build and resolve tension through harmonic complexity. You obviously do not, so learn to change other things, like rhythm and melody, to heighten the drama in a piece. (You will find, if you look closely, that almost every successful piece ever written throughout history has this key point of tension and resolution in common.)

I'm not sure about how to do that though.  I know that there are methods to increase and release tension but its more than just using some cookie cutter to get it to work. I.e., you can't just increase harmonic change and say it increases tension(or maybe you can but I've never been able to do it). You can't just increase rhythmic intensity and say it increase tension. Atleast when I try these things they just make the music sound artificial and contrived. 

Ofcourse I've never read anywhere how these methods actually work and sense its hard for me to "feel" tension its hard to interpret it in the master works. I do hear high points and such but not all music has these. For example, where is the climax of a fugue or prelude in Bach's WTC? (well, I'm not saying there arn't any but it seems like its not clear or not all pieces really them).

I guess though I just need to look at it a little more closely. I do think its an important point and all good music needs that tension/release idea. It just seems to be an concept that no one really understands enough to really explain or I just don't get it when they do(maybe its suppose to be obvious).

[thierry13]

I'm not sure about how to do that though.  I know that there are methods to increase and release tension but its more than just using some cookie cutter to get it to work. I.e., you can't just increase harmonic change and say it increases tension(or maybe you can but I've never been able to do it). You can't just increase rhythmic intensity and say it increase tension. Atleast when I try these things they just make the music sound artificial and contrived. 

Ofcourse I've never read anywhere how these methods actually work and sense its hard for me to "feel" tension its hard to interpret it in the master works. I do hear high points and such but not all music has these. For example, where is the climax of a fugue or prelude in Bach's WTC? (well, I'm not saying there arn't any but it seems like its not clear or not all pieces really them).

I guess though I just need to look at it a little more closely. I do think its an important point and all good music needs that tension/release idea. It just seems to be an concept that no one really understands enough to really explain or I just don't get it when they do(maybe its suppose to be obvious).

To increase tension :
1.Play, with both hands, incredibly fast octaves, with crazy big useless movements, without getting any relaxation, for about one minute.
2.See no.1

To release tension :
1.Stop playing.
2. ... That was lame.