May 16, 200817 yr Without a score it's fairly hard to comment specifically on this piece, but by ear I could identify a several points worth noting. Whilst this piece seemed to have potential, it is not actually a fugue, and ignores some of the basic rules of baroque counterpoint. It appears that you're trying to emulate something of the late baroque fugal style, but there are several stages at which the interaction of voices or individual lines sound flawed. If you're not trying to emulate another style, or to write a 'traditional' fugue, then what follows may be irrelevant, but I hope you'll consider it useful advice rather than mindless criticism. Firstly, the exposition uses the incorrect intervals. This is a rather major technical point, since it actually renders the piece more a canon or invention than a fugue. It also means that the characteristic tonic-dominant lilt of the exposition is totally ignored; the exposition hovers in C minor constantly. Secondly, the melody features augmented seconds as early as the two-part counterpoint of the fourth bar. Whilst the 'arabian' sound of the augmented second isn't something that's never seen in baroque fugue writing (Handel's 'Great' Fugues use them as characteristic features in one or two subjects), it's highly undesirable. Past the third voice's entry, things get rather too messy for me to analyse by ear. In short, this composition was probably a helpful exercise, and it'll be useful if you upload a score for others to comment upon.
May 16, 200817 yr Author yeah, thanks, is not really a fugue because is only the them, cannon and divertimento, for this is a "little fugue", not a real fugue, and also is not my stile, I'm minimalism, serial, 12phonist, and other new forms of music. thanks for comment.
May 17, 200817 yr It most definately is not a fugue. It's a 14-measure long canon in 4 parts, followed by a bit of free counterpoint to finish it off and a few measures of looser imitative counterpoint. The exposition is not there, there are no episodes, no strettos, nothing really that identifies this as anything other than a straight-forward canon. However, that said, it is still interesting musically. I find some of the happenstance harmonies a bit jarring and directionless, but the overall effect is still not too bad.
May 17, 200817 yr Author yes, i now thats not a fugue, i now, thanks, for comment, is called like a fugue because i want to call it like a fugue. after all, is my daughter, not yours. thanks for comment, again.
May 19, 200817 yr yes, i now thats not a fugue, i now, thanks, for comment, is called like a fugue because i want to call it like a fugue. after all, is my daughter, not yoursthanks for comment, again. your song don't have any work, is only a paste of good ideas, and the fugue is not a really fugue it seems more like a cannon, and is like i saw, boring. all the time is fast and in one dynamical them, really, i hate it. taken from THIS THREADHave a discussion with yourself, rudely enough and see what you make out of your self. Then I'll come back to listen to your work.
July 29, 200817 yr A small fugue from my small quartet #9, i hope u like it. 1) It's not a fugue 2) It's a strict 4 in 1 canon with a sort of development tacked on 3) Needs a bit of polishing up as it gets a bit cluttered 4) A good effort! Keep it up!
