Luis Hernández

Me refiero a que suena como con pequeños portamentos, nada que ver con eso otro.

A delicious piece. The piano is very active and playing a very important role. It's an odd combination of piano and two violin sections, and it seems to work, although the role of the second violins seems very secondary.

Wow It sounds very intense and spectacular, with 4 voices... The truth is that it catches you in a non-stop progression. I think the shortness of it benefits it given its textural intensity. The sound of the strings sounds like it's a podo “dejado” (I don't know how to explain it.... in Spanish “dejado”). Is it some effect. Greetings, and congratulations to your mother....

I think it is very beautiful music and, in my ignorance, it does transport you to that special atmosphere.

Hello This is an interesting question. I think that whenever a piece is tonal, or has those roots, you have to specify tonalities in the armature. Whether they are all put in every time you modulate may be a matter of style. In baroque they didn't use to change the key signature with modulations. In romanticism it seems to be the norm. I think that leaving the score without any key signature is for atonal works, where all accidentals must be indicated. In your work, which by the way is very good, there are moments that can be expressed in another way. For example here. That mix of measures with sharps and flats is a bit strange and I also think that for a pianist it can be confusing. I would have continued with flats in bar 35, writing this bar, and bar 37 as Cb (which, yes, exists too). And in measure 39 place a key signature for Ab. What sounds there is an Ab6, or a G#6 (although in this case the F natural should be written as an E#). Anyway, you can see everything... I've always been amazed at what Schubert wrote in this piece. He already uses a strange time signature. The whole piece is in Gb except for a bar and a half towards the end where he breaks the whole key signature and puts there chords like D, D7/C, Gm/Bb... and resets the original key signature...

Yes. For my taste it is a bit fast. But it's a personal thing. I think the phrasing is lost a bit and the repeated notes, for example, sound totally percussive.

Of course, yes. I understood the intention of the third of mischief, giving a more optimistic ending. What I meant was that it's not something that romantics did. If we get into their way of thinking, everything was sad and gloomy in these kinds of pieces. But, of course, it's a choice to use it.

It sounds very good and I identify it in that early classicism style. I think it has good themes and a quite spectacular development. The only thing I have to object is that the union of the sound of the virtual piano and the speed of the piece makes (for me) that the musicality is lost a little. Greetings.

This work is impressive and considerable. I think that for its length it has no comments. Nowadays it is difficult to hook people with extensive works. Greetings.

It is a beautiful little piece of work. I think that in this romantic style, the background of the counterpoint, which is what (I think) you master the most, is more than fundamental. Although some people don't pay it the attention it deserves. It's very emotional and that's why it's in the style. What I think is less frequent is to use the picardy third at the end. Greetings.

I will survive.

A very interesting work. Perhaps it is a bit too “intellectualized”. Let me explain: there is a succession of modes and tonalities, some a bit “infrequent” that, given the strong character they have, the transitions between them sometimes don't work too well. For example between the second theme in Bb acoustic (Bb Lydian dominant?) and E minor. Then abruptly one ends and the other begins. At other times it works much better. The first part has a strong sonority because of the phrygian question (what is Dorian Eb phrygian? maybe Eb phrygian with sixth?). From measure 60 on there are a lot of chords in the bass part that make it sound heavy and undefined. Especially because they are sounding for a considerable period of time. There are “rules” for using chords in that part of the tessitura, in general, but the main thing is to open-lighten the chords. The truth is that the piece is an intense work and the most remarkable thing, from my point of view, is that the counterpoint sounds very good. One observation is, also a personal matter, there are octaves for almost all the development. I don't know, Liszt used them everywhere, but he knew very well what he was doing and when. To me it sounds excessive and in the end there is no contrast. In other words, except for the beginning, the texture is very dense all the time.

Nice work, which I forgot to listen to. For this type of work I like the harpsichord sound better. The initial theme or subject is quite “catchy”. I think the second theme comes in at measure 32? I was pleasantly surprised by the “cadenza arpeggiata”, I think it also has a role of a more rested section. And it sounds chromatic. When talking about Double Fugue, I understand that there are two subjects. I suppose you can work by exposing them separately, or sequentially. Is it also possible to then overlay one on top of the other? Best regards.

@FILMSCORE I don't know... When I've tried to orchestrate something I've done for the piano..., I almost never get to the end. I prefer, if it's for orchestra, to do it thinking about it from the beginning. But well, it can be a challenge...