The Baroque sonata

Hello again! Oh, I know, haven't been here for ages...This is my attempt in composing something barocco-like...Any comments are welcome!

Not bad!
Cheerful and a bit funny.

Yes, I agree, fairly cheerful and a touch of funny.

I like everything about this piece on the large scale, nice simple straight forward form, very solid thematic material, a decent development. The only problem is... it's not baroque. It's close, but I would say it's more of early classical. Pre-Haydn, pre-Mozart, Clementi... those folks. Somewhere right in the beginning of the classical era is where I feel this fits.

Okay, a few specific things I think you could improve.......
Use slurs, they help the pianist understand the phrases better. You have of lot of suspended appoggiaturas such as the right hand in beat 3, measure 1 (could be wrong on the term, "appoggiatura") that should typically be slurred. Of course, you don't have to use them, but don't be afraid to. If you're not sure how to use them appropriately study some piano scores, especially baroque and early classical, you'll see how they work with the phrasing added by the editors.

Stylistically, measures 6-8 could be taken up an octave. In the early classical style you took to, this seems wrong to me as low as it is. Same thing right after the 2/4 bar on page 3. Of course, you're the composer, you can do whatever you want.
The extra low notes from measure 10 and on I'm not going to complain about though, because it sounds cooler to me. It is a decently wide leap for the left hand though.

Page 2 of the .pdf, 10th measure thereof, you have those triplet in the right and dotted-eight and sixteenths in the left hand. In this second measure of that pattern, you'll notice the right hand is playing a D minor arpeggio. Left hand should reflect this... instead of the C# in the left hand here, I would suggest a D instead, it makes more sense. Same thing two measure later.

Small detail... 15th measure of page 2, where is the upper A in the left hand? The previous measure includes the upper octave, this one doesn't. I think it would help (even if very little) to clear up the harmony by accentuating the octave here like you did in the previous measure and maintain the balance.

Same measure, last beat, left hand... does this D belong to the descending part in the right hand? If it does, fine, but if you consider it not to be, then that's a rather wide jump in the left hand into the next measure intervallically. Well, it seems so to me, maybe it really doesn't matter. But you know that last beat in the right hand here? It's the triplet F, E, C right before an extra wide jump all the way up to a G and Bb over an octave above. You could have the left hand play this, that eliminates the dangerous leap the right hand has to manage and the leap for the left hand isn't all that hard.

Really charming piece, melikes, been listening over and over, not getting of tired of it yet. Keep it up!

very charming a piece! very well fashioned and with appealing effect. nice job!!!

Thank you all for your comments! EnigmusJ4, special thanks for so comprehensive and solid analysis of my piece, I'll think of improving it.

Originally Posted by Ascold

EnigmusJ4, special thanks for so comprehensive and solid analysis of my piece...

Avec plaisir. Or, if you don't speak French.... "my pleasure!"

I really like all the trills and ornamentation (although it wouldn't be the easiest to play, especially the left hand trills ). Also like your use of rhythm in certain sections. eg- contrasting quavers or doted quavers against triplet quavers in the other hand. And the overall structure of the piece is pretty good too... I like nearly all your choices of melody, cadences and harmony.

Originally Posted by finrod

... all the trills and ornamentation (although it wouldn't be the easiest to play, especially the left hand trills ). Also like your use of rhythm in certain sections. eg- contrasting quavers or doted quavers against triplet quavers in the other hand...

Trills in the left hand? Shouldn't be a problem for anybody with some experience and decent technique. A beginner might not manage it, but we're not interested in writing specifically for beginners, are we?

Those conflicting rhythms between the hands that you brought up here, that is one of the reasons I thought this was more of an early classical sonata movement than a baroque one, as I've never seen anything like that in a baroque sonata before.

Ascold, ever consider writing two more movements? I think you could, so far you've followed after Kuhlau and particularly Clementi sonatinas rather closely. With a slight baroque feel of course, but it's only in my personal opinion that it is slight. I say go for two more movements.

Originally Posted by EnigmusJ4

Trills in the left hand? Shouldn't be a problem for anybody with some experience and decent technique. A beginner might not manage it, but we're not interested in writing specifically for beginners, are we?

Well I got to 7th grade piano (and have played 8th grade and higher pieces) and trills in the right hand were never a problem for me.... but with my left hand.... bah!! I could only manage about half the rate of my right hand.

Originally Posted by EnigmusJ4

Ascold, ever consider writing two more movements? I think you could, so far you've followed after Kuhlau and particularly Clementi sonatinas rather closely. With a slight baroque feel of course, but it's only in my personal opinion that it is slight. I say go for two more movements.

EnigmusJ4, thank you a lot, yes, I'll think about two more movenments, again thank you for your advices! A strange thing, when writing this piece I didn't think of Kuhlau or Clementi in fact! Their music is much more "classical" and easy (not all, surely) than this sonata, and they did never use such technics as far as I know. Pre-Haydn, pre-Mozart? Maybe, but what was before Haydn in the field of sonata? Mainly piano works that sounds nowadays as a real baroque music, especially by Scarlatti, Wagenseil, Cimarosa, Galuppi, Paradisi and so on - if you listen to them, i'll find how similar are they to my piece, much more than so-called "pre-classics", I think. But, of course, this is my personal opininon and each your advice and commment is very helpful and interesting for me.

About technique: yes, it is not a piece for a beginner, you're wright and your words about pianist's experience and "decent technique" are true, I think it is very playable, especially with some changes, which your adviced me to bring in it.

The matter is that I'm more a specialist in the history of music, than in composition, and so in fact my music, I suppose, is not as original as, for example yours. Maybe it is strange, but I feel that the concepts of my own music are so out-of-date, so old-fashioned...I think I simply have not yet found my own, original way in music, and so this is my main problem now. And there is one question which disturbs me for a long time, it's not an easy question - whether the modern composer can write music, as old composers, using their musical language, their olden forms and some ideas, but to make in result of the process something new and original? Wouldn't it be just a simple recurrence of something, that has already been many years ago? What do you think?

Anyway, thank you for the comments, they're so encouraging for me!