muchen_

I forgot to add this last time, but I thought of this (infamous) aria when the breathing problem was mentioned. In addition, for historical reasons, this cantata is usually transposed up a semitone as opposed to down. Just look at the tessitura of this melisma! Bach must've really hated the poor soprano who had to sing this...

I especially love the meditative prelude. The section beginning at mm. 26 with repeated notes and chromatic harmony is extremely elegant and tasteful. The bass line is particularly well-written, and patterns like mm. 51-53 brings subtle drama. The entire piece is playable too! Personally I think some reordering/transposing/rerun of the material here would give the piece better cohesiveness. The reappearance of the quaver-dominated opening material at mm. 15 for example can be in the dominant or relative key, and rerunning it again later (though maybe not in its entirety), particularly near the end brings not only unity but also some excellent contrast to the surrounding French overture rhythms.

Absolutely! It's a real pain in the arse to do in Musescore though 😄 It's added to my to-do list (along with some dynamics shadings). I'm acutely aware of the problems of creating actually good-sounding music and I'm very grateful for you pointing this out. One of the nice things about the Baroque ritornello theme in a vocal context, is that your theme does not even need to be singable. The tenor aria from BWV 81 provides a particularly striking example. A common and easy solution for this problem is to just have your soloist sing an independent melody in counterpoint with the ritornello theme whenever it is reused. I've attached an example of this technique for my aria.

This is a secco recitative in the late Baroque style for alto, part of my cantata WIP. The text is taken from Goethe's Die schöne Nacht. An example translation of the text can be found here. I have also attached a little preview of its paired aria 🙂

Quoting what I wrote in a thread earlier: Furthermore, unless a sub-forum for AI music can be quarantined, I strong believe that all AI music should be banned. Quarantining in this context means nothing posted in this sub-forum will be presented to users by default, unless they specifically looked for it (new posts/replies in this sub-forum will not show up on the sidebar on the main page etc). Without quarantining, just making an AI sub-forum is the equivalent of allowing AI to exist on this website in its current form.

Thank you for listening! I've been disappointed in the orchestral soundfonts I've found so far: all of them have too much vibrato which doesn't suit this style of music very much. The 8-bit soundfont is a pretty nice alternative which provides a clean sound that I like. If you (or anyone else) have a workaround for this which closely imitates the sound of HIP (historically informed performance) Baroque music then please let me know!

Beginning a chorale with a V chord on an upbeat is generally considered a mistake. Bach himself would almost certainly harmonise the first two chords as I-I (with an octave leap in the bass). The overall tessitura of your tenor and bass parts are approximately a third too low. Passing 6-4 chords (m. 2/4) and unprepared sevenths (m. 3/2) are relatively common place in Bach's instrumental music and most of his other vocal music, but not in chorales. The melodic interval of an augmented 2nd (m. 3, alto) is completely forbidden. Diminished 4ths (m. 5, alto) are on the other hand fine, but in this context it should be resolved to a G rather than a D. The minor sixth in the tenor in m. 7 can be improved by a "passing" C. There's a lack of complexity throughout. Nothing wrong with that of course, but complexity would give this more colour. Things you can consider: seventh chords that aren't just dominant sevenths, more 4-3 suspensions, 9-8 suspensions, choosing non-obvious harmonisations, harmonising occasionally in quavers etc. Of course you can ignore all of this if you're not trying to emulate Bach's style. If I were to do that personally, I'd ask myself "why" before I break these rules. Hymn/chorale writing is an extremely well established style and I'd need a very good reason to deviate from the norm.

Calm yourself. Note also that defending religion on the internet is a pointless endeavour and I'd advise against it.

I'd say it's probably more of a "consistently used device for purely historical reasons", certainly a small detail not worth glossing over. Overall I like the fugue, and as you said, it's indeed fun. I'm a big fan of how you chose to retain the original harmonisation through your countersubject(s). The piece just wouldn't be the same without it! The counterpoint and motivic development are both very good. What I find lacking is the choice to include the extraneous 9th bar in the subject. At the risk of the fugue becoming a bit foursquare, I find its inclusion to be a little inelegant. In addition, the appearance of a rising chromatic scale in the subject harmonisation is something which I feel like should be explored more: the harmony in the episodes is too tame in comparison.

Can you elaborate and define what you mean by "fullness"?

This is an accompanied recitative in the late Baroque style. The text is taken from Goethe's Unbregrenzt (unbounded). I have also attached the aria "Nun Töne Lied". These form a recit-aria pair, part of my WIP cantata.

Yes! The flute + tenor pairing is one of the classics (like trumpet + bass). As far as the "aria" aspect goes, it's a blend of ternary form and a ritornello theme.

It's a lovely trio sonata. My favourite movement is the 2nd. The subject is interesting and your treatment of it is very successful throughout, with a well-planned structure. I would personally omit the re-exposition before the stretto entries, and expand on the stretto material - I think it's here a contrapuntal goldmine that is somewhat underexplored. But overall, the piece is rhythmically varied, motivically tightly-bound, idiomatic, harmonically consistent with the Baroque (I love the Neapolitan chord near the end!), and with well-written counterpoint throughout. For me, the biggest weakness I find is the lack of variety of form. The fourth movement is almost identical to the second from a structure PoV, and the third lacks a formal structure. Principles like binary/canon/ritornello/invention/gallant sonata are all reasonable tools to reach for that will make your movements have greater diversity and contrast. Writing the third movement in a major key helps too!

This is an aria in the late Baroque style for flute, tenor, and continuo. The text is taken from Goethe's Unbegrenzt (unbounded).

I really like this cantata. You do a lot of things really well: the bass line is nice and melodious, you have very catchy ritornello themes, the macro structure of all of your arias & sinfonias make musical sense, there's a great deal of variety between the movements in terms of the core musical ideas, and you have a great sense of rhythm - all of the pieces have an excellent driving energy. It's clear that you have the Baroque spirit in you! The biggest thing I personally find lacking throughout is more adventurous melody and harmony writing. I find myself wanting more use of chords in first & second inversions, suspensions, seventh chords, appoggiaturas, more frequent modulations and use of chromatic chords etc. - all the usual musical devices that spice up your work and give it lots of colour (Disclaimer: having listened to Bach all my life, I am not familiar with the Italian Baroque, so perhaps this is my complaint with the idiom as a whole rather than your music specifically). Two other definite issues: the "recitative(s)" here ought to be called "arioso(s)". Assuming this is a solo cantata, I also think the tessitura & range of your alto should be more consistent throughout the cantata. Compare what he/she has to sing in the first aria vs the last, as an example. All of the music I compose is in the Baroque style too, so perhaps you may be interested in this?