Fuga In B-flat Major Deo 38

A little short, but still crazy and original! Try to extend this idea! Really good!

p.s.: I can't read the score... :/

I like your piece. good mix of energy, humor, and chaos i think. must be all the K & Z : )

hbv; unp frg rf gne?



Oh, that's just my own language that I made up; it's the same construction as an English sentence, but with each odd-positioned word translated into French and each even- one translated into Irish, and then turned into anagrams; then each letter is replaced by its compliment that appears if you cut the English alphabet in half and match the order of each letter of the second half to the first half and vice versa, 'cause I like to be fancy. That's cool, right? Or are we not doing that anymore?

This piece is crazy, it's supposed to portray the very soul of baroque happiness, spirit, & imperial mentality. Thanks for the reviews.

Measures 8 and 19- I'd make them into trills instead of repeated faster notes. Less messy and easier for the performer to read.

Also, as stated above, I'd definitely expand it. It seemed to just...drop off. Like "poof! We're done!"

Measure 20- why do you naturalize the Ab, if you don't even have an Ab? The next measure you put the Ab back into the key signature (which may have been a mistake). Instead of putting a key change, I'd put double sharps on the A's on that last chord if those are the notes you were looking for.

Did you intend to have a lot of hand cross-overs throughout the piece? I haven't tried to play it on the piano, but I'd try it out and see if some of those are indeed possible at that particular tempo.

I'd like to see you continue on with this, let it grow into a truly magnificent piece. Keep up the good work!

Well, this sure isn't a fugue. I'm not sure if you dived into writing a fugue before actually knowing what one actually is or you... actually I'm not sure there's an alternative. Do read up on fugues if you have not.

Your made up naming convention is dumb, for many reasons that I will not go into.

Your counterpoint isn't the best. You should be able to do better with only two voices. I know this is modern, but there is a difference between effectively utilizing counterpoint in a modern style (breaking traditional "rules," even) and using modernism plus unnecessary reverb to cover up sloppiness.

Ktd vi?

Qrxv ey llornt:
1.) Pprrt 1-5
2.) Sngnt Tt
3.) Kntplr stvx 3, 4,mn 7

Lpnr ttni rncklp kr!

But but ... there's parallel octaves and stuff in here!

Your right about measure 20 Elizabeth, now that you mention it, i am puzzled myself, i will try to extend this little short fugue & post it when i am finished, thank you for the suggestion. Ian, the reverb in this case does not cover up sloppiness since i only added reverb after hearing it many times without it but it became obvious it sounded better as if present in a magnificent baroque concert hall mesmerized by godly architecture. Nonetheless Ian, your right about some things. Thanks xiangyik for the lament.

hbv; unp frg rf gne?

I am puzzled by this piece as well.

Right, the first couple measures are fugue-like, I could follow the theme's two entries. But I guess that's it, so I must assume you're to work with only two voices. From this point on, the piece goes crazy indeed, to the point that I can no longer distinguish what each voice is doing among the huge melée of fast paced notes and breath-taking rests.

I pretty much agree with what has been pointed out so far:

1) A good idea to start with - but gets too quickly drowned. You could work this into a true "fugue" with enough exposition, episodes and development, even if you want a short work. I hope you do so, taking into account the above reviews, most of which I tend to agree with.
2) It's difficult to follow the individual voices - which are what a fugue is all about.
3) Parallel octaves (as pointed out by Xiangyik) are a definite "no-no", esp. when working with only two (independent) voices. Especially when working into a modernist style, a composer has a lot of room for rule-breaking and fanciness, but these can and should still be built over recognizable principles.
4) Watch out for hand overlaps and notation issues (most of them already pointed out by Elizabeth) - the piece is hard enough without these flaws .

Here's the link to a very helpful thread about fugues: http://www.youngcomp...writing-fugues/

I hope this comment has been constructive and helpful.

Thank u austenite 4 d lesson link, i will check it out. You know, i am starting to realize dat perhaps what i want to write are not fugues but rather a fugato since i am overwhelmed by the narrow dull strictness of the fugue, then again, besides many annoying yet genuine fugues by the masters, there are very good ones like the fugue in D major from the well-tempered klavier book I. I've just been listening to a dvd of the Keller Quartet & the art of fugue, & it is becoming unbearble to my ears, even the contrapuntus IIII & IX, seem like artillery against my cortex. The Killer Quartet is good, i am not disputing that, i am also listening to The Jack Quartet playing the Xenakis Quartets & like the tetras of iannis best. I will post a remake of thiz fugue of mine after it has disappeared from site in the solo keyboard section. It will be called, "Fugato In B-flat Major Deo 38b. What are the guidelines of a fugato, does anyone know. Do you think thiz work can be regarded as a fugato without a doubt?

It doesn't matter if you title it a fugue, fugato, or fughetta. The criticisms would still apply; they're all fugues of some sort or fugue-like. The main problem for me is your bad counterpoint. Renaming this won't change that.

I will say that a composer has the right to express himself in any way he pleases, break any strict rules of counterpoint if he so chooses, & the right to enjoy music. A true composer enjoys the music, not dissect it, not to mention be as innovative as he so desires. Now, if i had the desire to master counterpoint, i would have done so already, but it seems too dull to dwell on the same old laws of fugal writing. Creativity is boundless, as an intelligence to create something new rather than deal with the ancient restrictions forever. I use the word fugue freely simply because it did not fit any other category. Now in turn, fugato means the strict diciplines of the fugue are relaxed, for me it means that it can be any contrapuntal work but liberated from strict narrowness like i did with this work. As for fugetta, it means a short fuga. What i am trying to say is that i do not care much for criticality in music what so ever & therefore music is the infinite where anything is possible. Copy this url in your browser: http://www.youtube.c...&v=qj9QlWltv8s. Here, Ligeti does as he pleases as an etude, but regardless of the possible order in the chaos, he has no limits. Music is in the most general perspective as big as the imagination & even though there are strict art forms & their definitive formulas, the formula for music in the widest sense is unreachable, unfathomable, & indivisible. Being the composer is like being the creator, construct anything you wish with laws, without laws, &/or both, it is your prerogative.

for a futurist excentric you care too much what others think of this.

The ligeti piece is highly organised I asume. I cant imagine that this applies in a similar way to your thingy as well.
there is some motivic relation in the 'fugue subject' but except for one sort of recap of a sort of countersubject, there is no cohesion whatsoever.

Dear fellow musicians,
I am amazed -better: amused- about this lengthy and intense debate on fugues, fugettas and fugatos. I may introduce another term in this discussion: the fugarello, which is -as far as I know- kind of a little fuga with some add-ons and extensions.
Let me also tell the following story:
Some time ago I wrote a little piece and set "Fuga" in the title; I was quite proud of it, because it was my first "fuga". When I re-read this "fuga" word on top of my little piece it stared at me, started scaring me, and I thought of all the strict rules a "fuga" might have to follow which I could not have done as I did not even know all these rules. As I did not even feel it could be a "fugarello", I just named it as that, what it is: a "little piece".
Will upload the fugarello-like little piece in a couple of minutes for your kind analysis.
Regards, Stephan
PS: I hope nobody feels offended, this is just my strange german humour... :-)

Heh, you don't know what a fugue is. Perhaps you'd like to write a mass too?

Perhaps Vobiscum, what i am aiming for if you want to be specific, is a soft of Lustige Melodie like the one found in the movie amadeus when Mozart is asked to play in the manner of J.S.Bach which is also not of the fugal family yet i know of no critique regarding it.

Actually this is exactly as what I regard the piece right away:
a "musical joke", a "fuga ridicula" ... :-)

Thank you very much Stephan, fuga ridicula makes a lot of sense.

You are very welcome, Marzique!

Having clarified the classification of the piece as "fuga ridicula" now, I have a couple of further questions:
1. Is your new system of works cataloging, which I find quite interesting by the way, starting with No. 1 and is it incremented by +1 for each new work? If so, where are "Deo 1" to "Deo 37" - I would be pleased if you upload them here on this platform!
2. Does "Deo" have something to do with "Deus" = "God" and does it therefore mean "to God"?
3. Who is "Kriztoval Luzius Amadat Krizzagrim"?
4. Why did you use the pedal only in Ms. 14?

As a side-remark, I may add, that I actually quite like your "fuga (ridicula)", having heard it now about 20 times or more :-)

Thank you! My system of cataloging my latest works is as follows, ex: Deo17b would be a revision of Deo17, otherwise it's a chronological system. Deo refers to the omnipotent being of all possible musical & non-musical data thus us artists & the scientists extract it from the diametric totality similiar to the writer's block. Kriztoval Luzius Amadat Krizzagrim is one of my pseudonyms as a kompozer after many combinations to finally arrive at my favorite. As for the Ms.14, i recently made a revision of this fuga ridicula as i now call it thanks to you in which a new version the ped. is put away replaced by ties; though longer & not for harpsichord but for piano since Elizabeth one of the moderators in this YC commented on would try to play the harpsichord version on her piano but i think that a harpsichord piece has to be altered if played for piano. I will post this new version once my MP3 is out of sight in the keyboard section. I guess i can post Deo1-37 as midi files, but i am not really satisfied with all of them. I am not sure what you mean by in this platform. As far as i know you can't post here, let me know your thoughts on this. I too sometimes need to listen to my works many times for the charm to be implanted which i find mysterious.

Hello Stephan, for the mean time i want you to check out these two works of mine from you tube as thanks for your assistance:(http://www.youtube.c...h?v=PTvOhhZxw7Y), & this one:(http://www.youtube.c...h?v=o24yi-5I4Yc), tell me what you think & i hope you enjoy them.

Without contributing to the discussion, I wanted to say that I don't like this piece (the way it sounds). Not just the high beeps and hisses that are in the recording. It is chaotic in a manner that feels to me like you have been putting notes on paper without thought. Whether you want to call that your artistic process inspired by divine forces writing through you, or your inability to compose... I frankly don't care. Also the fugue thing, as far as I am concerned you can call a popsong a fuga, if I don't like it I won't listen to it
This comment is not meant to be negative towards you, just to give you my personal opinion. I also listened to the two youtubes: in the manner of js bach is not really in the manner of js bach. For that you should write counterpoint, which I think is absent. I did enjoy the fugue of illusions. Again, probably nothing in there that reminds me of bach. Maybe you should let go of this idea that everything remotely reminiscent of bach (fugue-like opening, harpsichord sound) is actually in the manner of bach. Wouldn't it be way cooler to have your own unique style and sound? You can learn from the masters but by merely trying to imitate them (and not succeeding at that) what do you expect us to say?

Roy, i understand, i only recently decided to but a book on counterpoint for the sake of legitimacy & intellectual pleasure. Do you think this you tube link work is not to be criticized simply because it was composed by a hot shot from the movies in that is too short even though the theme is sweet?: (http://www.youtube.c...h?v=1oPdJUS7CIo)

That 'improvisation' from amadeus is pretty nice. It is in style though, bach according to mozart, and is very convincing especially considering the context of the movie. Film music composers are by no means just hot shots. They usually are pretty good and certainly professional composers, capable of composing in many different styles and genres. Does that answer your question or did I misinterpret?

But you wouldn't call it of the fugue family would you?, & if so, which one in the family would you choose as correct? Furthermore, i while not knowing all the secrets of counterpoint, at the same time am trying new horizons. You might find this essay of mine insightful: http://www.youngcomp...e-fugue-family/

The music you linked to is much more of a fugue than yours. I'm not going to explain what characteristics make it so, you should really find out for yourself and learn what a fugue is. I also don't think you should be writing essays on fugues while not knowing anything about them or about counterpoint.

Well Ian, in the essay, i contributed what i know regardless of my compositional incompetence.

Very funny music LOL LOL LOL LOL.Hey do not fade up! try some more.We may have one day a new comedic chaos genre of music for you Marzique.I think I was wrong ;it's the most funny thing I have ever heard whether music or words LOOOOOOOOOOOL