String Quartet in G major (Movement 1 and 2 done)

it is complete and an mp3 link has been provided.

i'm not sure some of those double stops (mainly the seconds) are an especially good idea to use. They can be rather difficult play for a violinist. You might want to ask a violinist if that's possible, unless you are "div." them. It's a very nice piece, though. I like that.

thank you, Morgri

yes, I do intend to remove those stops. I don't remember ny rationale for making them seconds, and I'd still recieve a fairly harsh sound with a fourth or fifth.

I have started work on the second mov: a simple and short (5 min-ish) minuet. I am COMPLETELY stuck on the trio, though. I have uploaded my current progress.

If I have one complaint of the second movement, it's that there isn't enough melody. The compositions are fairly pleasant, but both lack the lyrical, flowing melodies or easily recognisable germ-motifs that make Beethoven so instantly appealing. If you want to imitate Beethoven, you need tune! The second movement for example might easily have incorporated a cantabile melody, a memorable song-like tune. As it happened, the pieces ended without my having worked out by ear what either the tune or germ-motif was. Around the 5:00 mark I recognised a theme returning, but there hadn't been much in the way of development or alteration.

You don't lack musical ability, but to my mind a lack of motivic cohesion is a major shortcoming of this particular composition. Did you work out the tune and bass at the piano before you started composing? Did you sing the lines aloud before you committed them to paper? These two steps are, I find, straighforward ways of ensuring you don't end up rambling... which I feel these two movements do rather dissappointingly.

The third and fourth movements should help you to repeat material extensively, circumvent the problem. I hope this has been useful criticism.

Well. Thanks Zetetic!

Hmm I am really astounded that you thought that there was not much coherency. That is what I REALLY tried to infuse into this piece. Then, I guess I've failed. In the first movement, EVERY phrase has a version of the motif... If you look at my works, I use motifs almost exclusively (such as in the overture). The first movement's motif is a simple one. Three beats (the exposition uses a dotted half, and the development takes it some steps further, with three quarters, then eighth notes) and the fourth beat of the measure is a triplet figure (in steps... ascending or descending). I think the problem is, this motif is too ... vague. In fact, I did this because I find Beethoven's pieces too literal in their repetition... that's just my taste, and I write my pieces accordingly.

In fact, I thought that the second movement was WAY too repetetive... but I guess not to your ears. I also thought that the motif was extremely apparent, given that it is repeated many many many times. It is a simple motif (again, this might have been too vague) of two descending (half-step wise) eigth notes, followed by a sustained note, followed by an arpeggio. In fact, even in the counterpoint section, Almost EVERY measure begins with the two descending eigth notes, whether they are clear or hidden. Finally, the second movement is in minuet form, I developed the theme/motif up until the B section... (which is the trio.. again, quite obvious because of the slow down). Then, this development is reversed, until the repeat of the exposition, at the end.

Really, I tried my best to write a good piece, but I haven't had any experience for this ensemble... so it hasn't come out the way I wanted it to. Sure, there are many critiqueable elements to the piece, but I thought that coherency would be last on the list... guess I was wrong .

For coming up with the melodies/bass what not... I improvise daily on the piano. Usually there are one or two melodies that REALLY stick. Then... I just think about them. I think until I have determined the structure/how to develop/orchestration etc. etc. Then, I do more playing on the piano to fully flesh out the theme/motif. Finally, I input the exposition into sibelius and start working on the development.

Thanks for the critique.

I'm sorry to have singled out structure, Maelstrom. Looking at the score, it's obvious what you mean. The problem is far less apparent in the first movement than the second, but I stand by my assertion that you need more direct or close repetition. Sonata form relies on repetition of sorts (ineed, in Beethoven's time, called for *direct* repetition), and makes your task as a composer easier.

It's a very common criticism that composers run off with ideas too fast. Great that you're so understanding though. This was, of course, just one reading of the composition. There's next to nothing objective about the appraisal of composition, but plenty that's objective about the appraisal of pastiche (which is, at least partly, what you're trying to do).