String Quartet in G major (Movement 1 and 2 done)

This is my first real attempt at writing a piece for string quartet. It is in sonata form in G major. I am currently finished with the second movement and will begin the third shortly. I have yet to clean the score and add slurs and more articulations.

I would really like to know what you all think of it, and any comments on what to work on would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

thank you, thatguy, for graciously providing an mp3.

there are some parts where sustained notes suddenly cancel, and there are places where the instruments take some time to fall into their dynamic level.

I still have to add slurs, bowings, and some articulations.

i really like this piece! very nice one.

but from bar 37 to 50, i like the thing, just work again on the harmonies because they are not this intresting... try to put more different and varied things between parts.

overall is not bad. i like it.

i agree with punkitititititititititititititit tat in regards to the harmonies after that certain point. You clearly know how to write classical-ish music, and im starting to see your own style come out of this rather than a beethovenish sound. Kudos for that.

But yea, I think you really need to sit there and think harder about your harmony. Your counterpoint understanding is good, but can be better. I have written for string quartet like...once, and thats when i first started. It was horrid, so I wont go back to it for a long time.

However, you seem to be on the right track, just go back and find more interesting harmonies and work out your harmony a little bit better.

:) Love your work.

Thanks punkititi and goodridge....

Yep.. this is my first time and writing for a smaller ensemble is certainly difficult. I have actually been told that this sounds like early-beethoven, so I guess I haven't really found my own *special* style .. though I really like Beethoven, and that's why I try (and fail) to emulate him.

I am thoroughly confused, though, about that section, though. I won't go as far as to say that there are supremely interesting and complex harmonies there, but in comparison to the other sections, that actually has a lot more complex harmony. ... So I think it is a rythmic issue instead of a harmonic issue that you are both talking about.

Thanks for listening :)

I have actually been told that this sounds like early-beethoven

:musicwhistle:

Actually, I thought the section you were talking about was pretty interesting, to be honest. o.O Your music would be more interesting if you let some modern influence creep into your music, instead of just relying on classical and romantic conventions, imo. As for the piece as a whole, (even though it's not finished lol,) honestly I think you could have done more with the parts. You have 4 voices to choose from, and each one is a solo instrument, which ggives you room to give them more interesting, active parts than you would in an orchestral setting. Techniques that you use in orchestral music don't always work with smaller ensembbles, and I think you should consider that a little more while you're writing. The harmony in the piece is nice, as I mentioned earlier, and it has a nice sense of motion about it. That you take advantage of rests to let the melodic parts converse is good, and makes the work more interesting. It's a nice start.

Good start, especially for a first attempt. The bad midi sounds were annoying but as far as I can tell it was pretty good. I wouldn't worry about your piece sounding to old fashioned...many people on this site don't like true neo-Classicism without any influence from the twentieth century, but I say, if all music has to be relevant to the present, what's the point of listening to music from the past? Don't worry about relevance, if its a good piece, it's a good piece. This piece is worth finishing.

neo-Classicism without any influence from the twentieth century.

then it's not neo-classicism lol. neo-classicism is taking classical ideas and applying modern techniques to them, hence "new classicism."

I think it comes from the misconception that "neo-[fill in the blank]" is the same thing as "revivalism".

Neo-classicism is most definately NOT "writing in the style of composers from the classical period". If you want good examples of neo-classicism, listen to Strawinski (if I recall correctly, music from the late 40's an 50's), some pieces of Samuel Barber (his 1st symphony is a remarkable application, despite its "romantic" overtones, structurally, it's neo-classical), Francis Poulenc, Paul Hindemith...

Definately ALL composers whose music is WITH influence from the 20th century.

no, it is not rythmic... the rhythm is kind of good...

i was talking about harmonies, but maybe i expressed it bad, since English is not my language anyway what i meant to say is that in that part there's something static...

you just hear the same thing harmonically, even if there are little changes, it is not of this great impact that makes you say "hey! that's cool!".

as i said i like that part, but can be made in a better way, maybe moving drastically to other keys, so to give this sense of motion, i don't know if i make sense. i like the rhythm.. just should be less homogeneous and more varied...

i am sure you can do it better, you just need to get into the thing more... try to play it at the piano, and see if you like there. you have written good music, so this one have great potential to become a good pieces well ;)

about the style? whatever! don't try to force yourself doing something, it never comes out good. with time you'll evolve, or you will have maybe a great and deep impression that will change your path in a second. but until that, just do what makes you happy and what makes your heart and soul happy. whichever style you like, just do it, and do it good and with pleasure...

thanks, voce and Symph Concertante.

I agree that my writing would improve a lot once I gain a firm grasp of the quartet idiom. Right now, I'd say that I am transitioning from the orchestral style to the quartet style. And this piece is certainly the most harmonically ''daring'' piece I have written. Also, I wouldn't say that this is anywhere near the classical style of music or the romantic styles. I haven't improved enough to be able to do that :P . I just write music because the beauty of creation pleases me, and the above writing does this. I believe that all music has value, so you should write in whichever way that will please yourself the most (after all, that is the main motivation for volunteer composers).

and punkititi , you MUST be talking about a different section than you cited.

the beginning (A) : I V I IV vi VI etc. simple

the part you mentioned: i iv V i i V/iii III IV7/III V7

a little more complex :sweat:

thanks for your comments :)

it is complete and an mp3 link has been provided.

i'm not sure some of those double stops (mainly the seconds) are an especially good idea to use. They can be rather difficult play for a violinist. You might want to ask a violinist if that's possible, unless you are "div." them. It's a very nice piece, though. I like that.

thank you, Morgri

yes, I do intend to remove those stops. I don't remember ny rationale for making them seconds, and I'd still recieve a fairly harsh sound with a fourth or fifth.

I have started work on the second mov: a simple and short (5 min-ish) minuet. I am COMPLETELY stuck on the trio, though. I have uploaded my current progress.

If I have one complaint of the second movement, it's that there isn't enough melody. The compositions are fairly pleasant, but both lack the lyrical, flowing melodies or easily recognisable germ-motifs that make Beethoven so instantly appealing. If you want to imitate Beethoven, you need tune! The second movement for example might easily have incorporated a cantabile melody, a memorable song-like tune. As it happened, the pieces ended without my having worked out by ear what either the tune or germ-motif was. Around the 5:00 mark I recognised a theme returning, but there hadn't been much in the way of development or alteration.

You don't lack musical ability, but to my mind a lack of motivic cohesion is a major shortcoming of this particular composition. Did you work out the tune and bass at the piano before you started composing? Did you sing the lines aloud before you committed them to paper? These two steps are, I find, straighforward ways of ensuring you don't end up rambling... which I feel these two movements do rather dissappointingly.

The third and fourth movements should help you to repeat material extensively, circumvent the problem. I hope this has been useful criticism.

Well. Thanks Zetetic! :)

Hmm I am really astounded that you thought that there was not much coherency. That is what I REALLY tried to infuse into this piece. Then, I guess I've failed. In the first movement, EVERY phrase has a version of the motif... If you look at my works, I use motifs almost exclusively (such as in the overture). The first movement's motif is a simple one. Three beats (the exposition uses a dotted half, and the development takes it some steps further, with three quarters, then eighth notes) and the fourth beat of the measure is a triplet figure (in steps... ascending or descending). I think the problem is, this motif is too ... vague. In fact, I did this because I find Beethoven's pieces too literal in their repetition... that's just my taste, and I write my pieces accordingly.

In fact, I thought that the second movement was WAY too repetetive... but I guess not to your ears. I also thought that the motif was extremely apparent, given that it is repeated many many many times. It is a simple motif (again, this might have been too vague) of two descending (half-step wise) eigth notes, followed by a sustained note, followed by an arpeggio. In fact, even in the counterpoint section, Almost EVERY measure begins with the two descending eigth notes, whether they are clear or hidden. Finally, the second movement is in minuet form, I developed the theme/motif up until the B section... (which is the trio.. again, quite obvious because of the slow down). Then, this development is reversed, until the repeat of the exposition, at the end.

Really, I tried my best to write a good piece, but I haven't had any experience for this ensemble... so it hasn't come out the way I wanted it to. Sure, there are many critiqueable elements to the piece, but I thought that coherency would be last on the list... guess I was wrong :P .

For coming up with the melodies/bass what not... I improvise daily on the piano. Usually there are one or two melodies that REALLY stick. Then... I just think about them. I think until I have determined the structure/how to develop/orchestration etc. etc. Then, I do more playing on the piano to fully flesh out the theme/motif. Finally, I input the exposition into sibelius and start working on the development.

Thanks for the critique.

I'm sorry to have singled out structure, Maelstrom. Looking at the score, it's obvious what you mean. The problem is far less apparent in the first movement than the second, but I stand by my assertion that you need more direct or close repetition. Sonata form relies on repetition of sorts (ineed, in Beethoven's time, called for *direct* repetition), and makes your task as a composer easier.

It's a very common criticism that composers run off with ideas too fast. Great that you're so understanding though. This was, of course, just one reading of the composition. There's next to nothing objective about the appraisal of composition, but plenty that's objective about the appraisal of pastiche (which is, at least partly, what you're trying to do).

This sucked. I hated it. =P

Thank you for your comments Mr. Bersanetti!

Yes this is one of my older works, and it was the first try in my genre. For most of the things I have written, I didn't do so well on my first try writing for it and I just slowly improved. So, I suppose my four voice writing has improved now because of more counterpoint/harmony study as well as practice....

I think I shall keep the main ideas, even though the theme is very... naive.... but what can you do. And, of course, I do like writing, and string quartet is just a better medium for me because of the large number of string players that I know. A woodwind quartet that I wrote recently just HAPPENED to be mildly difficult and it became non-performable.

Thank you for your comments!