December 21, 200817 yr This was composed last night. The composition utilizes a new structural (form) idea that I began tinkering with yesterday. The basic inspiration behind the idea is continuous development. The form is similar to Rondo (ABACADA). If interested, I'd be more than happy to discuss the structural premise.
December 21, 200817 yr Hey there, Away from technical and theoretical jargon (which I am not experienced with), I can tell you that I liked and enjoyed this composition. Good Luck!
December 22, 200817 yr I'd be very interested in hearing your explanation of the form. I'm not particularly well versed in theory, so forgive me if some of my comments make you go, "Uh...what?" I try, but I don't have that much experience doing this sort of stuff. I enjoyed the introduction a lot. I am personally a very big fan of trading off voices between the right and the left hand, and I particularly like how you've done it here. Once you move into the beginning of the next section (notated Episode in the score), I think it gets a little bit chaotic. I enjoyed the variations in rhythm in measures five and six, but from there I thought it got a little bit muddied. I think it may be because of the very abrupt key change. The transition from so much speed (rhythmically and emotionally) to the quarter note phrases was also a little bit abrupt for my taste. I was particularly enjoying the music in the measures right before the switch, and then I felt like out of nowhere, you kind of dropped the ball on that one. The second quarter note section however, I liked a lot more. It wasn't as thin as the first and therefore I didn't feel let down as I did previously. I really liked both the measures preceding that second quarter note section, as well as the staccato section afterwords. Very well done. I didn't really like measures 52 through about 78 though. I listened to it twice and I picked up on what I think you intended to be rhythmic development (I think), but again - it was such a drastic change and to be honest that entire section got slightly boring. I wish I could give a theoretical reason why. However, from about measure 81 onwards, I loved it. I really enjoyed the return to C Major for the resolution, and the resolution in general. Overall, I enjoyed this, particularly the A section and the variations upon it. I'm not the most experienced critic, so again, my apologies. Now, if you excuse me, I'm going to listen to this again. I liked it. ~Christian
December 22, 200817 yr Author Thank you all for your comments! The overall form of the piece is similar (slightly) to rondo. However, the sections marked episode are intended as development as opposed to being the customary ritornello. The goal was to make musical development the norm for the composition - this is partly why there are so many abrupt changes. mm16 - 19 (first quarter note passage) is both a lead in and the main germ for the music which follows.
December 23, 200817 yr Author It is, yes. though i wouldnt necessarily say asymmetrical (D sections were typically developmental in nature and included music from previous sections.) In a way, you could say that in this piece I've made the A section (Episode) and omitted the D section entirely - could breath new life into the form? I kind of like the thought, though.. that its a newer form (connected to a traditional form) BUT newer none the less :P
December 23, 200817 yr i think it would be more effective if the development had more connection to the original theme, that is, if the listener could tell that they are supposed to be related. Its a nifty idea though.
