Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


J.Santos last won the day on December 10 2019

J.Santos had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

33 Excellent


About J.Santos

  • Rank
    Intermediate Composer

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

830 profile views
  1. Muchas gracias. La verdad es que coincido, y me parece que es muy repentina la transición desde el primer motivo, pero la verdad es que a eso solo puedo hacerle un pequeño arreglo, porque es lo que realmente siento y quiero en el momento musical. Yo el único problema que veo es como entra la barra 17, pero creo que se puede enlazar modificando la 16.
  2. Thanks a lot for your comment! I personally don't feel the first part off, just the tempo makes it seems more constrasting. The E minor sections are all based (including the part on major relative that is on the same section) on the same motif, and if you pay attention you can see how the voices work together to develop into that final section.
  3. Agree with Luis, this piece is quite beautiful, but lacks of direct variation. Since it's a romance and and not a prelude, and the piece is more than 2 minutes you would expect something of countermotion, changes, contrast. Melodically and harmonically talking is beautiful to a great point. This kind of has the same mistake as my Musical moment in D major, but I guess sometimes you don't have the time, or other things just doesn't feel as right. Sometimes monotony is also a good thing, and so demonstrated Satie.
  4. Amazing job! As I commented in one the video, the motive is obviously Bach's second prelude WTC I. It was a very good way of using it. I love when people take composers motif and develop their own creation, that's the most amazing thing in music for me.
  5. Thanks, but I wouldn't say innovative, because I use late-classical and romanticism a lot xD. The difference is that sometimes I try to introduce "innovative" things, but not that much, but I also have to agree because meanwhile I try to find my own style (in classical-romantic) most of people just try to imitate rachmaninoff, beethoven, mozart or bach, and that's awesome, but not new.
  6. You got some points there. I specially disagree with the 12/8 since this piece is 2/2 and I don't feel like 12/8 is the right way of grouping them. I think I will change the bass part in the second part with D and A major section
  7. Thanks! I thought that specially the transitions are the more smooth in this piece (between repeats), eventhought I would agree that the A major transition could be way better. At least so did most of the people say.
  8. Thanks! Harmonically talking, everything is just as I want i, Maybe I havent noticed a little mistake and something that should be natural is sharp, but I didn't notice yet. I thought this kind of practice was already known, but in late classical an romantic the repetitions signs could be ignored and are to the interpreter to be used or not (so you decide if you repeat it or not, and which ones you do). Also those are exact repeats, but originally in classical style there were a practice were in a repetition (seconda volta"") the interpreter would improvise and add ornamentations of all kind, and as I see it's very easy in the A section to ornamentate and variate. The personal way I would interpretate this piece is repeating the first 2 sections, where I variate and ornamentate the melody with fillings and and then not repeating the second section. The repeats (except for the D minor section ones) are there because formalities, but as I say, you don't need to strictly obey. The coda it's very in place, if you would carefully listened each part you would realise that is a not far variation of the end of the section B (in B minor) that leads to D, but using the andalusian cadence. I'm not still convinced for the final cadence in the last bar to that double D major chord, but It can be easily fixed.
  9. I've abandoning it latelly, but here I bring you a piece I made out of something I improvised:
  10. Yeah, that's exactly what I said, that it's a highly subjetive matter. So there's no point on pointing it out as a reason to people as a matter of sounding like X. Using older composition's doesn't specially help your idea but reinforce mine, since previous eras used a diferent standart pitch, so in baroque it was A = 415hz, romantic 432 and now 440, so what was D minor for us now, might be Eb minor for Mozart, and for Chopin is was a not very tunned D minor. There's no discussion about the feelings it transmits, because it's the piece (melody, harmonic, instrumentation, artist) that work nowadays. In older eras, non tempered music actually sounded different, so different keys gave different feelings, so much that even at some point F# was discarded as unplayable, and with unplayable, i mean: Again, objetively the key doesnt really matter to bring up emotions if you are using equal tempered instruments or system. The only time when it matters are: 1. It makes easier/possible to play your piece (like depending on one instrument like strings in open strings position, or getting the piece to A minor, because you want to use the most lower note that ends with the tonic key) 2. you're actually using non equal tempered system.
  11. Not really helpful about your question, but I wanted to remark some mistake that you might have about keys. In our modern day system (equal temperament) there's no different keys feelings, the only time when different keys could feel different were when other but the equal temperament were used (baroque and so on), where the keys did actually have different physical sound variation (Hz), and so they could make you perceive different feelings on each key. Practically if you associate a key with a feeling, it's mostly some kind of synesthesia or a mental thing, that is nothing but very subjetive. I've saw you saying about how C minor is X or other keys a lot, and again here, so I just wanted to make that part clear, since is objetive information.
  • Create New...