Sonata No.1 for Violin and Piano

Hey guys,

It's definitely been a while! Although I haven't posted anything in a while (due to time constraints as opposed to lack of composing) I've finally got something worthwhile to show you all. Back in October my friend asked me to write him a piece to be performed on his senior recital (he is a music education major at the school that I'm going to attend starting next year - James Madison University). I had no limitations or anything as to timing, form, etc... so basically, I just sat down and started writing it.

After sketching most of the sonata out, I finally got it organized enough (cut out some stuff, added some others, etc.). I finished that whole process probably by about December, then sat on it for about a month and polished it to the final version back in January.

We had a few rehearsals before the recital, and they all went really well. My friend does want it to be known, however, that he is not a performance major. I think the performance went well (minus a few flubs on both our parts), and the audience loved the piece... I even was asked to perform the piece this fall on one of the violin performance major's senior recital!

Anyway, enough rambling! I've attached a PDF of the score and a link to the mp3 file below. As always, comments and criticisms are appreciated!

- Duff

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Also, sorry about the watermark at the top of the score - I had to piece this mother together from several different PDF files, but the music is all there. Enjoy!

-mp3-

You do realise that 4 staves are entirely unneccesary for that first bit? It looks like you took a piece of normal 2 staff music and split it to make 4..... anyway, it's pointless.
Going to listen now.
Ok, listened. Last page needs 3 staves at max.

Quite a pretty piece - full of good moments. I liked it.
However, there's a lot of harmonic inconsistency. The plain modal bits in the middle were rather bland compared to the more interesting stuff towards the start and end.
The score is a mess. I assume the 8vb in bar 80 was a mistake.
A couple of places seem unviolinistic.

Fairly good playing throughout though - and good to have played and recorded your own piece, so good job.

Daniel,

Thanks for the quick response! I am very aware of the notation of the piano in the introduction, and very pleased to say that I prefer it written that way. I showed this piece to Dr. Hilliard (my to-be comp. professor at JMU) and he was basically enthralled that I chose to write it that way - noting that many people wouldn't normally do that, and actually don't like to! -- Same with the ending

On the harmonic "inconsistancy," the piece is linked together from the opening harmonic motif shown in the introduction, and the piece is basically meant to stem from that - often times deviating very far from it, though. It was intentional to have these passing/contrasting sections from one part of the sonata to the next, the beginning, middle and end being the richest. So, while I can appreciate your critique of it, I don't find it to be anything close to inconsistant.

"The score is a mess." haha, yes, I know. And I'm sorry. This wasn't the score I drew from - I just can't find my original on the computer, so I had to draw from about 7 different individual print offs from it... and yes, mm80 is most definitely an error: should be 8va for the piano. Thanks for pointing that out.

This was really my first time writing a work for solo violin (aside from in string quartets), so I definitely used it as a learning process - obviously had some bumps along the way. Overall, though, I'm pleased with how it turned out.

Thanks again

noting that many people wouldn't normally do that, and actually don't like to!

Yes, that's because it's incredibly bloated and detracts from (rather than adds to) the clarity. Fewer staves = better.

I find it to be anything close to inconsistant.

Well I suggest you have a close look at the harmony of the sections in the piece. I don't think the piece is incoherent, but certainly the difference of the type of harmony in the sections is quite large, and almost jarring. You're just deflecting my point.

Anyway, I'm glad it went well for you. It has an American flavour to it -- which is interesting (to me).

Hallo buddy!

Okay, so putting aside any comments about notation or score format which I don't have on account of not giving an immediate shit about them, I will focus my response on the music, considering that's what I assume you care about. I will also refrain from commenting at any length about your violinist. He plays.

Moving right along, the piece itself spoke to me and I really liked that. It had a certain stately elegance to it and it was undoubtedly tinged with your incidental side, but what I liked about it was how it melded that into a concert piece that's very accessible to a not high-brow audience. That is REALLY important these days, I think, for those of us just trying to "break in" as it were.

Besides having memorable thematic material, I thought that your harmonic development (much to Danny's chagrin) was a point of interest for the piece - it helped really define the progression for those that aren't aware of any particular reason why it might be defined as "inconsistent".

I liked the interplay between the instruments too, and I'm happy that you gave the piano such a pretty part. That bit where it plays alone really solidifies a certain "mystical fantasy" sound that the piece stereotypically adopts. I was happy with that.

Overall I really enjoyed this piece, especially because of that fact that it is, as I mentioned, such an accessible concert work. It doesn't require someone to be a stuck-up music nerd to be able to appreciate or understand it - it might even be bad to those people. But for an everyday audience, they can just go in, listen, and enjoy it for its pleasing sound. Big kudos from me for that.

Congratulations on getting it performed and thanks for sharing!

I'll have to agree with Daniel that the four staves are rather excessive.
The opening page could easily, and more importantly - CLEARLY - have been notated on two staves. The four stave thing is, in this case, quite unnecessary, and smacks of rachmaninovian pretention. The 3-staff sections were fine. The final page could easily have been condensed to two staves as well.

Sadly, most composition teachers know very little about notation standards and acceptable notation procedure.

Remember that the ONLY important factor in deciding how something will be notated is CLARITY. Not how "cool" it looks, nor that you CAN do it that way. And in this case, clarity dictates fewer staves, not more.

OK.

You are obviously entitled to your own opinion about how I chose to notate the piece, and I am entitled to mine as well. You feel the expanded notation detracts from the clarity of the piece, I feel differently. Daniel feels the same as you, others feel the same as me. Considering I was the person performing the piano part, I think it would only make sense for me to notate it as I would prefer to read it - so, no brainer, I did. I can assure you that it was originally notated for two staves and, after I thought about it and worked with the score, I decided against it.

I'm aware that many pianists despise when composers write in expanded staves, but as a pianist and composer myself, I couldn't really care less. I did what I did - not to be "cool" (now that wouldn't make much sense, would it, Qcc?), and not to go against the grain (I don't see you bashing avant garde composers in the other forum for doing things because they, simply, can). I've explained myself and my reasons and feel that there is no reason to press the issue further. Oh, and "The four stave thing is, in this case, quite unnecessary, and smacks of rachmaninovian pretention." --- please.

Originally Posted by QcCowboy

Sadly, most composition teachers know very little about notation standards and acceptable notation procedure.

I would agree with that most of the time, but I happen to know Hilliard's works rather well, and have seen his scores. He may, as remarkable as it sounds, know exactly what he's doing.

Originally Posted by QcCowboy

Remember that the ONLY important factor in deciding how something will be notated is CLARITY.

I agree...

Now, I've apologized for the score and would truly appreciate some worthwhile critique on the piece itself (thank you Marius and Daniel). I can manage a score fine, especially when I actually care enough to put work into it. I've said it before - this was not the final score, so don't treat it as such. Only use it to to follow along.

Not trying to be defensive or anything, because I understand what you all are saying, I just know how I feel comfortable notating this piece, and that's how I chose to do it. You can do whatever you feel like in your own piece - the beauty of art, right?

I must say, this is one of my favorite pieces I've heard on this forum. I think the tempos are spot on, and the harmony is interesting while not hard to listen to. There was a lot of variation while maintaining consistency, good for my short attention span.

You've accomplished something that I find difficult. Entertaining, sophisticated, yet accessible.

Bravo!

MonkeysAteMe,

Thanks for your kind words. I'm always glad to see when someone enjoys one of my works as much as I enjoyed writing it! I'm also happy to see that you liked the many changes in tempo - my main worry when writing the piece with certain sections that contrasted in tempo was that it may feel disjointed. I thought I smoothed it out, so I'm relieved that you thought they fit well!

Originally Posted by MonkeysAteMe

You've accomplished something that I find difficult. Entertaining, sophisticated, yet accessible.

Thanks to you and Marius for commenting on that aspect: I really enjoy writing in a more incidental/filmy/game style now than I ever did in the past, so I found it a fun challenge to keep those elements as present in the sonata as possible, while still maintaining the "concert work" attitude of the piece.

- Duff

This is a wonderful piece, I just love its slightly ethereal quality. I can tell you're a pianist - the piano part is idiomatic while stuff in the violin part, like the fourths, is very awkward.

Also, not a good performance by the violinist. You did quite well, though (assuming you're the pianist.)