|
This is nice although I was sort of enjoying the old ricercar approach you had in the earlier version. I also kind of liked the exposition you had in the earlier one more, with the 3rd entry in the higher voice, and the double-neighbornote figure was also nice for development (its overuse could be worked around), but at the same time I like something you have done here. You have introduced a motive which could be repeated throughout for a long fugal development, and would work well. What you have done here in that sense is more fugal. However I am partial to the approach you were taking in the previous version. The inversions of the subject you have here would work fine in the other one. It's up to you what you do with it, and you have nice ideas in both. They don't both work together if somehow merged as they are different styles. The florid ricercar style of the earlier one was working nicely. I hope you decide on continuing the earlier one and finishing it.
|