Ok, so to help you understand what I'm trying to say, I've copied and reworked the first 18 or so measures with tonal music theory in mind whilst trying to maintain a baroque aesthetic. Notice in my rework what I have done. This is how I would have done these first 4 bars had I written this piece. I have relabeled the Roman Numerals to better reflect the harmony that you suggested (which was simply i-V65-i). Also notice I have included dynamics at the beginning of the piece, as well as a metronome marking, and I've nixed the solo violin as I felt it was redundant. I have revised the second violins to not interfere as much with the first violins; see how they overlap much less. This provides melodic and harmonic clarity. Look also how the bass line now has the scalular run in melodic minor, which means it includes the leading tone for F-minor, making the tonic feel stronger. I also made the beginning of the 2nd bar in the bass an E-natural to bring about better harmonic clarity (dominant chord in first inversion). Finally, notice how at the ends and starts of each new measure, the lines cadence to each chord with smooth voice leading. This next system had a very nice sequence over the circle of fifths. The biggest changes I have made was to raise the leading tones, which makes the harmony clearer. I have also changed the Roman Numeral analysis, since much of the harmonies you analyzed would actually not be functional. This would simply be labeled as a sequence. The next system felt imbalanced because of the premature resolution. I decided for this example to extend the dominant pedal, and I believe it had a great effect. I also adjusted the harmony to better reflect what you implied, which would be some augmented 6 chord (your analysis said VI and then later, VIb5, however, the functionally since it leads into the dominant, it would be augmented 6. In the second one, there was no flat 5 present, instead the 5 was actually raised, making it a Germain 6 chord. In the future, be sure you understand chord functions.) Here I have continued to adjust the notes to match the harmony you implied. In particular, I found the parallel 4ths to be problematic and changed them to parellel 6ths. Finally, here I felt that the music began to lose momentum, so I simply cut out a few bars. Note the entrance of the soprano has a dynamic marking, and it appears above the music. This is so it doesn't interfere with the lyrics. Also be sure to divide the syllables properly and know that the "____" marks the ends of words being sung over multiple notes, and the "-" only occurs between syllables of the same word. Your usage of both of these is very inconsistent and unclear. And note how I simplified the line to make it slightly easier to read and sing. The rest of the piece has similar issues throughout. In terms of playability, I have already explained that the soprano is too fast and intricate and especially goes too high for this speed. Here is a great chart for vocal part ranges. choral-ranges.pdf Slightly simplifying the melody, especially removing the appoggiatura, should help. As for the violins, you mentioned they may go too high in some areas. They do not, the range is fine. What bothered me were these huge leaps. However, having checked with a violin player, these are actually doable. The changes I've made are obviously free to take what you like and discard what you don't. The important thing to keep in mind is that the music has proper voice leading, and clear harmony. My revision does improve it, but there are other ways to improve it besides what I did. Just remember to study voice-leading and harmonic function more in depth, and you'll be golden OVosOmnesReworkAndAnalysis.mp3