Concerto in F minor for Harpsichord and String Orchestra

This is a spectacular piece of music. Hearing this quality of music being written in a "historical" style has been one of the most exciting and unexpected treats I've encountered on this site. To my ears it is entirely true to the style, yet has it's own voice. Very, very nice playing by the way. Sounds like you have access to a good instrument too.

Hi all!

MASSIVE EDIT:

All of the previous posts on the individual movements have been consolidated into one thread, thanks to chopin

Just a bit about each movement:

I - Though the solo line seems a bit sparse, I chose to leave it alone. I like how the harpsichord picks up on the orchestra's material and transforms it throughout those long arpeggiated sequences.

II - Where the first movement showcases the orchestra a bit more, this one is all about the harpschord. A lot of imitation going on in the solo part, with a number of different recurring figures. Concludes with a Phrygian cadence.

III - A lively jig, with melodies dueling against each other in canon (mostly the keyboard part). Also features some call and answer between the keyboard and the orchestra.

It's the three on top, in order: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...?bandID=430217

Feel free to comment and critique!

- BE

Hey, nice piece. I would give a review, but I have no time, so one thing that i just wanna say real quick:

In the theme in movement III i think you should go f Eb Ab instead of f C f the 2nd time around, you can keep the melodic passage, it would fit nicely.

Originally Posted by The Baroque Enthusiast

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...?bandID=430217

This link doesn't work.

Try this one: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...?bandID=430217

It seems to work for me, the URL is intact, even if it doesn't read that way.

- BE

Just listened to the Vivace. I don't find this to be nearly as adventurous (especially harmonically) as some of your other works. Your thematic material is very simple, which, while I'm sure makes it very accessible for many, doesn't hold my interest.

Occasionally, it seems as if your are sneaking in an aire of classicism to this work. And you'll have to forgive me for not being able to articulate it very well, but for instance, your cadences (phrasing) and larger harmonic motions remind me of Handel in places.

While on the one hand, I am critical of the adventurousness of this (I just wish it was meatier), I am intrigued by what I perceive to be a stylistic approach that involves a morphing of different eras.

Of course, I may be way off-base here. I am in no way an expert on this stuff. I'm probably just educated enough in the nuances of these eras to get myself in trouble, and obviously, your level of expertise is significant. As is usual with your music, this piece is very well crafted with a high sense of style.

Hopefully I can find the time to listen to rest of the suite.

While on the one hand, I am critical of the adventurousness of this (I just wish it was meatier), I am intrigued by what I perceive to be a stylistic approach that involves a morphing of different eras.

Of course, I may be way off-base here.

No, thanks for the critique. I appreciate it.

On being adventurous harmonically: I guess I wasn't as focused on that when writing the third movement as I was with the first movement. I was thinking more of imitating horn calls, so perhaps that's why you were reminded of Handel?

On morphing styles: Not too sure, is anyone else picking up on that?

Hopefully you'll be able to find more meat in Mvt. II, leightwing!

- BE

Well, it sounds like I have already listened to the Adagio-Allegro. I'm guessing I have already commented on it elsewhere, but suffice it to say, I love it. The weaving complex melodies (especially the first theme), and textural explorations set the bar very high for the next two movements.

Just a silly question. Why end the first movement with a Picardy and the last without?

Originally Posted by leightwing

Just a silly question. Why end the first movement with a Picardy and the last without?

Hmm, that is a good question. I guess that because that there's such a prolongation of the material before the final cadence in Mvt. I, it made sense to bring that final release with the Picardy third. Mvt. III 's conclusion is just a repeat of the initial jig, with barely any frills, so I left the cadence as is.

Thanks for the input! I would still love to hear your thoughts on the second movement though!

- BE

G'day BE,

I've listened to the first movement and I think you've done a fine job with it. As another poster has mentioned, there is nothing awkward or harmonically offensive (or generally speaking, musically offensive). The opening Adagio and Allegro is really pleasure to listen to - up to a point.

However, as with many other baroque pieces, I tend to tire of the reliance on alot(some is good) of straight bar by bar(or strong/strong, weak/weak beat) sequencing and lack of rhythmic(in melody and harmony placement) interest. Around 3½ minutes I'm getting bored.

Overall, I think you've done a fine job emulating the period and nothing about it (to my ears) makes it less than many other lauded works from this time.

Although I enjoy Baroque music alot, there is much by great composers that, while enjoyable, is tiring (to me) for the reasons stated above. This is why my tastes run more to classical/Romantic music.