Piano Sonata in C# Minor (Major editing in progress)

This is a piece I wrote to take a break from my major scale works. As of now, I have two movements completed. Second movements of multi-movement works of the classical era were generally the slowest-tempo movements, but I decided to arrange my movements according to "feel". The first movement is under major renovations. The second movement (Presto Capriccioso) is in a semi-minuet form. I say semi because the trio is much slower than the surrounding landscape and it remains in the home key. The third movement is in a mix of rondo and sonata form. There is a definite exposition, development, and recapitulation and the theme of the first movement is repeated multiple times throughout the third movement (Vivace energetico). It is in an energetic 6/8. The coda at the end is quite long, but ties up the whole sonata into one coherent package. I believe that the third movement is some of my best writing.

Total run time: 5:39 + 5:18 + 3:45 = 14:42

I have tried to fix all of the mistakes that have been pointed out to me, so if any of you could spot any more please let me know.

I hope you enjoy listening to it; please post comments. Thanks

See, I'm not sure how to critique very well being that I'm just getting into music theory this year but rest assured I was entirely impressed. Damn near in awe. The volume was a bit incongruent but given that it's MIDI, it's acceptable and veritably something that would be amended necessarily in a live performance regardless. I'd really like to hear a third movement before I make an ultimate assessment but I recall no outstanding problems. (There were some elements I've have personally left out/added but as far as technical issues I can't recollect.)

Yeah, I definitely liked it. I hope my grandiloquence vaguely makes up for my lack of comprehensive critique.

Thank you for your reply and thank you for listening to my piece. Could you (or whoever chooses to reply) possibly elaborate on what you thought should be added or removed? I am open to new suggestions. I would even more greatly appreciate specific pointing-outs of errors or places of lacking strength. Thank you

I do not have a lot of things to say, except that it all feels very homogeneous. Granted I'm listening to a MIDI, and that can certainly make everything sound the same, but harmonically, all three movements sort of mesh together in my mind. Also, because there are three fast movements, it sort of blurs it even more. I know there doesn't HAVE to be a slow movement, but it helps to keep everything distinguishable.

I like:
When there are hidden melodies in the LH
When the harmonies take less predictable turns
When the pedal tones are used tastefully

However, i think that sometimes the left hand drones can become a little cumbersome.

One suggestions i would make is that it is great to incorporate motifs throughout your pieces. For instance, in movement I, there is a set of two half-steps that makes up a good motif that would be cool to use in less predictable places, as in hidden in different places in other harmonies, etc.

Overall, I would be proud to have written it! But I would not be surprised if whoever has to learn it sneaks into your house and stabs you for some of those jumps! (jk)

This is an interesting piece, although there are some things that I feel could have been done better with it. The slow section in the first movement still interrupts the faster part. You have to make a transition into that, you shouldn't just speed it up and expect it to work. Harmoniesa are pretty predictable, too, I think you could have changed it up a little.
I like the frenetic pace of the first movement, and how the thirds throughout seem to tie it together. It has a nice, broad sound in many parts that gives it a sense of brevity. Nice work overall.
The third movement is my favorite, and it seems to draw some from the first. Whether or not that was your intention, I don't know, but that was the impression I got. The rhythm seems to skip around a little in some parts, and I don't know whther you did that on purpose or not. I think it makes it more interesting, and I like the way the first and the third movements tie together.

Hah, I knew I had listened to this before! You have a bad memory, Anant, m'dear.

Anyways.

In regards to the third movement, as you have asked, I mostly liked it. Or at least, what's there of it. I'm assuming that there's more, seeing as the file which played on my computer (I stress the MY COMPUTER part; this thing's so annoynig) ended on a very abrupt half-cadence.

At any rate. It had great energy, and the musical phraseology was at once relaxed and unsettled... if that makes sense. I'm feeling paradoxical this morning, go me. All in all, it's crafted together well enough, and has a nicely late-classical feel to it. I'd love to see a score (that helps in analyzing), because I'd also love to try and play it myself.

And I'd really love to hear the finished product.

Keep up the good work, mate.

I really like the interplay between the left and right hand in the Vivace. The music took a kinda strange turn at measure fifty-five, but it didn't feel too "wrong" for more than about a measure, so I wouldn't worry about it too much. The dynamics also were nice in this piece. . . I wouldn't change a thing about them. The piece as a whole had bits of Mozart and Strauss in it, and I dug that style. The ending seemed a bit abrupt, though. I have no problem with ending on an unresolved dissonance for effect, but I think that a rallentando would have been in line.

Good stuff.

Sorry, I kind of left you hanging there... the ending of the third movement that you listened to wasn't actually the ending. I have completed the whole thing and the score will be up shortly. I will NOT be changing the slow section in the first movement. The interrupted feel is EXACTLY what I was going for. I am open to other suggestions!

The counterpoint between the 2 voices in the Secondary Tonal Area of the Exposition (first movement) is still really sloppy. I think a lot of it has to do with what the left hand is doing. It really needs to get out of the way of the right hand, and if you're WANT polyphony in that section, don't make it homorhythmic. For the record, have studied counterpoint all? Specifically 18th century or above? Also that drastic change in texture/depth isn't helping you either in that section, it just isn't as effective as the rest of the movement is definitely the weakest section. You'd be amazed by how much better your music can get when you simplify things, I would suggest downgrading that left hand part so this section can "sing" more. I really like the secondary thematic gestures in the Expo/Recap, by the way.

By the way, you can't really call this a sonata if it's Fast-Fast-Fast. Maybe you could write an additional movement that's slow, perhaps?

Also, notational issues. When you're writing dynamics for the piano, you don't put them for both hands UNLESS it's a very specific kind of gesture where you absolutely have to do this. But if both hands are forte, don't put an F under each stave, it's pretty garish. Also, there are instances where you're having the left hand sustaining a chord and you write a crecendo. Well considering that pianos can't do that, you might want to either make it more rhythmically active so it CAN crescendo, or just take it out, since a piano player is going to look at that be very confused.

Ok, I have fixed that section again, except this time with chords. I simplified it a lot. I also took out the score errors that you pointed out in both movements.

Like I said, I decided to arrange the movements according to feel instead of tempo. Not every single piano sonata written follows a fast - slow - fast form. Beethoven's 18th is moderato -moderato. I realize that it provides contrast, but instead of creating a whole movement for that, I incorporated contrast into each movement. It is a sonata in terms of coherency and form, though the tempos might not be to exact convention.