|
OK. First off, yeah, this isn't a fugue. It's barely near an invention, and much more like a simple imitation with sequences.
I found that having a harpsichord here was really really weird. I thought it was just for Flute and Cello!
A harpsichord if this were a fugue would be treated like at least 2 more independent voices, never as a doubling instrument even if we're taking about cyphered bass (basso continuo.) Moreover, doubling at the octave like that is very strange altogether. I'd understand doing this in an orchestral piece, and such other cases, but here in what is essentially chamber music, it sounds really unnecessary.
I rather have this piece without the harpsichord, it works much better. Plus, like QCC said there are some rather strange errors like the natural C before the last chord.
Also, he never exceeds the flute range, as far as I can tell. It's just REALLY uncomfortable to play that high. When writing this sort of thing you can't just treat the instruments as if they can play their entire register evenly and uniformly. There are some things which are a lot harder to play than others, specially if you want to get any sort of meaningful sound out of it.
Though, I think the counterpoint itself isn't bad, the subject is really really long, and I wouldn't recommend something like unless you've had plenty of experience beforehand. Again, like QCC, this stuff can't be tackled from the get-go properly if you don't have groundwork for the above reasons. Plus, you need to really know what the instruments are capable of and how to write for them, even if you're doing something Baroque.
Another thing, is the flute here supposed to be a recorder? Or a traverse flute? If it's "in-style" it'd have to be a recorder, and there you'd fly out of range really quickly.
|