Two baroque pieces

[Derek]

I find the act of recording distracting; I kind of got lucky with these and started to lose the proper mental state for this style near the end of the second one. Normally when I'm playing by myself in a fresh state of mind in the morning or refreshed for other reasons at other times of day I find it much easier to be fluent, especially at my old beat up kawai. But I am grateful I'm sometimes able to capture this on the digital.

[m1469]

Ugh!  I want to do this!  These are really good Derek.  Are these seriously improvisations?  You've been practicing Baroque style improvs for awhile, right?  

Did you start with phrasing?  I need to look again at your link about your Baroque improvs ... I remember you did a video where keys light up, right?

Thanks for posting these!  Woo!  Viva la Improv!!!    

I'm going to improv my way around in this world   .  Every single thing I do in life is going to be connected to improv, I've decided it!  BOOM, done.

[Derek]

Thanks m1469! I've always loved your improvs as well so I am really happy you liked these.
I think the thing that got me started initially was Ted's advice of "get your hands going in the same scale, it'll sound alright." I began gleefully following this advice, but definitely was a big fan of the style of baroque and wanted to figure out how to make those sounds specifically. I think I eventually read something about the basic idea of species counterpoint, and it gave me an idea to start with one against one, then play with two against two..etc.  But I think the exercise which really got me going was what I'd call "anchor voices."

I start with the bass, and just go completely stepwise either on major or a minor scale (but eventually when more comfortable, chromatic lines!), and try to make one other voice "snap" on thirds and sixths (and tenths etc. etc.) but treat other intervals as "necessary evils." That's basically what all common practice theory boils down to in my mind. Thirds are raised above all else as the sound we want to hear, and anything else if used too much will not be thirdy enough and should be discarded, except where the melody is so good you wouldn't care anyway. (Bach is guilty of this!).

Eventually I realized I had anchored too long in just the bass, and began treating the middle and sometimes even upper voice as the anchor, making the others snap to triads, playing with suspensions, etc. In my case I'm finding the more relaxed and the less I think the better it turns out. In fact, often when I go days or even weeks without doing this it incubates and surprises me when I do it again.

It used to bother me that I haven't done a lot of hard study of the "rules" as we call them today, and I used to be obsessed with this idea of thirds being raised above all else and trying to find out precise reasons why common practice composers treated fifths and fourths exactly the way they did, but I'm starting to let go of that too...and I'm finding that letting go is actually helping what I perceive to be better results! I'm sure the "vague" idea is right---thirds are the most important interval, but I'm not sure there are hard and objective reasons about how the other intervals are treated, just that if you want to have more than two voices or interesting melodies they just inconveniently get in the way and sometimes distract you from the thirds, so be careful with them. What better way to be careful than to thoroughly enjoy the sound of the thirds.

And yep they most definitely were improvised. I guess the only things that are not are tiny fragments of the stepwise anchor voice exercises that I mentioned earlier---but once those are in your brain they can be broken up in thousands of different ways. *edit* I am still finding it a fun exercise to try to anchor middle voices and especially the upper voice. For some reason the bass remains the easiest voice to anchor, maybe due to so much non baroque music being bass oriented or maybe because the bass naturally moves more slowly and produces more pleasing harmonic overtones than higher voices? I'm not sure.

[m1469]

OK.  I'm going to need to go through and read it again and get it sorted out more, but thank you for the explanation!  I've been trying to do more improv, getting it in about every other day, and I would really like to try this more concretely!  Thanks again!

[Derek]

One thing I've learned is communicating about something like this is definitely a challenging endeavor. I wonder if it'd help to create a video. And also, the little bits I described above obviously aren't everything. There's a lot of idioms I picked up either by ear or vague suggestions in music theory books, and even from asking questions to my piano teacher in college about what is going on theory wise. I think I learned about 6/4 preparations from him and then experimentation after that just made it settle in as part of the baroque vocabulary. I'd qualify all that by saying I still think I have an awful lot to learn, but I'm definitely grateful that it is possible for an amateur like me to develop this style in an individual way. I used to think it'd be impossible without totally dedicating my life to it.

[furtwaengler]

I've really been enjoying the discussion. The idea of what is pleasing is interesting, gravitating towards the 3rd and all....and how much of what you said reveals my "language" as opposite to everything that is pleasing, except where it is pleasing, and that usually has something to do with 3rds.

Listening to both of these improvisations, I admire the consistency and how they flow from one thought to the next in a seamless stream.

[ted]

It has to be said that whatever the nature of your internal, mental guidelines during improvisation, they are starting to produce a very successful baroque effect. Therefor perhaps expand your facility, not by studying established rule systems devised by other people, who may or may not have been improvisers, but by developing the personal playing dynamic you already have; the only criterion of goodness being the resemblance of aural results to intention, not conformance to established theory.

Essentially, use personal constructive theory rather than external descriptive theory. It seems to me that the two can be very different, as your remarks imply, yet with the constructive producing results having the same descriptive analysis.

Now it has to be admitted that I am pretty useless at imitating any established idiom. Classical ragtime composition was probably the closest I have  successfully managed, but even there the imperative to do something different for myself was far too strong. Also, I really do not know anything about any of the descriptive theories, so all in all I am just guessing.  

[Derek]

I keep wanting to always say "3rds and their inversions," cause that's what I really mean when I say 3rds. 3rds, 6ths, 10ths, and everything else are "the main sound" I want to hear when playing this style. All dissonances are used to just increase the sensation of pleasure when returning to these imperfect consonances--they never stand on their own for long.

I feel like all the other rules we collected from back then are subtle, there are many exceptions, and they're actually quite subjective. But the emphasis of thirds is definitely the clearest thread for common practice theory. The existence of all those rules were from years and years of very subtle consideration of optimizing use of thirds and balancing use of fifths, fourths, dissonances, etc. out such that the sound of thirds are never obscured or interrupted for very long at all. So, probably as an improviser I'll break those rules every now and then, but I'm thinking 90% of the time I'll get it right because those sounds really are quite beautiful, in the moment, and produce pretty powerful anticipation while improvising.

I'm also happy to report that though I did artifically speed up a couple of my *past* baroque improvs posted here---these were not sped up at all!

[tyler_johnson]

Wow Derek, I haven't heard any stuff that you've done in 5 years or so, what an improvement! Congratulations man, keep it up!

-Tyler

[pankrpec]

I'm always looking forward to a new improvisation from you Derek, you have never disappointed me (Except for the time when you posted those horrible Xenakis sarcastic pieces, one of which was played by your cat I believe) and I always enjoy listening to your pieces. I like these two also, they are so clean and methodical, a quality I often miss in improvisations.

Regarding the recording thing, I definitely agree with you. When I record an improv I am never as entirely relaxed as when I'm just playing for myself (or some small audience).

[furtwaengler]

I'm always looking forward to a new improvisation from you Derek, you have never disappointed me (Except for the time when you posted those horrible Xenakis sarcastic pieces, one of which was played by your cat I believe) and I always enjoy listening to your pieces.

Very interesting to me, I remember with great fondness the Xenakis sarcastic pieces, both for the comedic genius, and for the effect of the music itself which I even actually enjoyed! And I even love Xenakis! 

[goldentone]

Derek,

Your ornamental shading, particularly in the first, is very fine.  These are very good!

[Derek]

Thanks goldentone. I did have a few classical piano lessons in college where I learned a bit about shading, but I never consciously think about this while improvising. It is nice to have affirmed the fact that when improvising in a relaxed state, the ear often guides phrasing to be pleasing without much conscious effort.

[tyler_johnson]

These are awesome Derek! If I didn't know they were improvised, I would say they sound like full fledged compositions! They are harmonically convincing, structurally sound for the Baroque era, and have many many many perfect authentic cadences which really give it that true Baroque feel, especially employing things like the Picardy Third, and your 'sol-fa-mi' harmonies in the left hand. Analyze ANY of Bach's chorales and that's it right there.

I couldn't even begin to improvise in the baroque style, keep it going man, I want to hear more!

-Tyler

[Derek]

Thanks tyler    I'll definitely keep it going.

[thesuineg]

Lol. do you have the same genetic makeup as bach or something.
And thought I was improvising baroque.


Where can I see your other stuff?

[Derek]

You're very kind, but I think I have hundreds of miles to go before I reach a Bach level of proficiency. Besides, I haven't even tried improvising with my feet yet.

2 pieces, french suite

It seems like there are more and more people out there exploring this style and writing about it...so I'm sincerely hoping I'll find a way to grow far beyond the humble experiments I've posted here!

I also added 2 bonus tracks to this post. Note, the ending of the february one suddenly deviates from baroque to some decidedly non baroque arpeggiation. Not that there's anything wrong with that--it's a fun contrast.

[thesuineg]

I find improvising baroque is not as fun as classical (mozart early classical ish or like hadyn). When you play something that shows obvious inspiration its just really...fun haha....And it requires alot more speed in thinking of things. while in baroque you need to carefully calculate, in mozart its almost like gambling.

of course im equally bad in both lol.

[Derek]

while in baroque you need to carefully calculate, in mozart its almost like gambling.

To me, these styles seem quite similar. The only difference is the counterpoint is typically less dense in classical and a lot of the melodic and harmonic memes are are subtly different. I personally find classical more challenging because I haven't worked at it as much!

The idea that baroque requires on-the-spot "calculation" is a myth that should be dispelled. I think it may require more vocabulary building than other styles, and I suppose one could liken that building to "calculation," but it's really just practice--like anything. I don't perform any more conscious thought while improvising baroque than any other style.