Piano sonata no. 3 1st mov: allegro agitato

Some rather emotional events in my life have caused me to start composing constantly again. Here is one that I wrote over the last couple days (total time spent is somewhere around 8-10 hours).

MP3 | PDF

I intend to write one more movement: a long theme and variations piece.

I would appreciate any feedback.

Luke

A long theme and variations piece, eh? Sounds reminiscent of Beethoven's No. 32 - a fast allegro con brio and then a beautiful Arietta.

After listening to this movement, I'm pretty confident that you have listened to that sonata (although maybe you haven't). Your theme is similar.

Anyhow, I think the problem with the sonata is that in the exposition, enough interest isn't created. The main theme is dramatic but nothing ever really comes out of the theme. You don't develop the theme into something new like in No. 32 where the theme becomes a patterened run in both hands. Also, I think you may have repeated the theme a little too much, to the point where it lost some of its drama. One last critism before I move onto the good stuff, your piece lacked a major section. There was no repose like in No. 32. If you look at No. 17 in D minor by Beethoven, there is no major section because the piece itself is divided into peace and tranquility versus agitation and tragedy which can be seen in its main theme. Your piece would greatly be improved if your second theme, instead of being an agitated idea, was calm and maybe in F major or something. It would create contrast and interest.

That all being said, your piece was exciting and certainly has merit. Keep it up and I sincerely hope you do write a 2nd movement.

Also, did you listen to Sonata 32 by Beethoven, because it happens to be my favourite piano sonata?

EDIT : I don't mean to be nit-picky and I may be wrong but I think your sonata form is backwards. The second theme in the exposition is in D minor while in the Recap its in A minor.

yes i have listened to it and it was nice, and yes (BEETHOVEN no.32) but the sudden deceleration of the tempo was surprising, as a Master i tell you to continue with your works and to send me them as MIDI if you could to comment your composition Second-by-Second so that you can be sure that your works are correct, and for this one its fantastic and for an instance i may think its for beethoven!

Some rather emotional events in my life have caused me to start composing constantly again. Here is one that I wrote over the last couple days (total time spent is somewhere around 8-10 hours).

I intend to write one more movement: a long theme and variations piece.

I would appreciate any feedback.

Luke

This is good solid work (I'm almost afraid to say, some of the best I've heard here), now imagine if you spent more time on it?

I'd really like to see how you pull off a solid sonata movement NOT in the beethoven mold, that you spend a month working on.

Yes, I know sonata no. 32, and that's where I got the idea for the second movement. But don't take that as saying that I'm trying to imitate the first movement with this piece. Essentially, I finished this piece, and then asked myself what kind of later movements would go with it well.

Also, I am currently playing sonata no. 17. It's funny that you mentioned (probably) my two biggest influences for this piece.

Yeah, my sonata form is backwards. I wasn't sure how else to achieve the same power of resolving to Dm from 22 measures in its dominant. Having control of my modulations is something I still need to work on.

I'm not sure spending a month on this piece would make it that much better. I have two composition styles: when I am writing on the computer I tend to be very linear; I very seldom go back and change things I have already written, and I generally write the song from beginning to end.. except for a few times when something sounds a little off and I change a few notes. I'm not sure why that is, but when I spend a lot of time on a song, it's usually because I have writer's block, and write three measures then delete them, write a different three measures there, delete them, etc. Writing my piano concerto has been like this, with maybe a little more modification because there is more opportunity for revoicing in a concerto.

When I am writing on the piano, it's pretty much the opposite. I improvise over and over, gradually refining it into the finished piece, keeping parts I like, changing parts I don't like, etc. And I keep it all in my head and in my fingers, and write it at the end. But that music tends to be much simpler because I am not skilled enough at the piano to play eg. this piece (well, that's not true, but it would take me a couple weeks to learn--that is, it's not practical to write a piece of this complexity on the piano.

I'm not sure what you mean by "the Beethoven mold". Do you mean the particular incarnation of sonata form where the exposition is repeated verbatim? Do you mean my plan for the second movement?

Thanks for all your feedback!

I'm not sure what you mean by "the Beethoven mold". Do you mean the particular incarnation of sonata form where the exposition is repeated verbatim? Do you mean my plan for the second movement?

Thanks for all your feedback!

by "beethoven mold" I mean to be writing music that could pass for Beethoven.

you obviously have a strong musical ear, and I would MUCH rather hear YOU in your sonata than hear Beethoven pastiche.

one thig you could do, without necessarily breaking the form (which in my opinion remains valid whatever century it is in), is to sketch ideas for themes. Don't compose until you have established good solid thematic material, pages and pages of sketches.

then sketch out on paper, with words (not musical notes) what it is you intend on doing with the piece. I don't see a need to stick to any particular keys, but sketch out a simple frame-work for whatever you will work on - intro-exposition-development-recapitulation, then add compositional detail to that framework - "loud/soft/sad" - "chromatic passage/big chords/little chords/getting more and more dissonant/getting more and more tonal/atonal" - "fugal exposition/polka/disco/whatever", etc...

you can then associate your actual thematic material to your new more detailed framework.

working this way helps you to stop relying entirely on your ear to compose. why not rely on your ear? because when you do you often end up copying, even subconsciously, something you've heard before. until you have built up enough craft and technique to consciously apply techniques to your composition, this can really help.

This is not Beethoven pastiche at all. Certainly it is in the romantic style, and romantically modeled in terms of form, but it does a lot of things that you could scour all of Beethoven's scores for and never find. (Except for mayby the Grosse Fuge, but for crying out loud, that piece has everything including the kitchen sink.)

Anyway. You do some really interesting things harmonically in this piece - things that break out of the simple diatonic scheme of your main theme. And it's a good thing, or else it would be Beethoven pastiche. I had no problem with the form of the piece, and I think that little squabbles like what key a certain section is in (and if that fits sonata "form") have absolutely no relevance here in the 21st century. The question that reigns is: "Does this work?" and in general I think this piece does.

My constructive criticism relates to the textures you've chosen for this piece. To my ear, the allegro sections are too busy too often. Go look at any Beethoven sonata and see how he balances fast, virtuosic passagework with less busy sections. (The Waldstein sonata is a perfect example of this.) The switch to the slower section in your piece is also accompanied by a change in texture, and the switch is so sharp that it almost sounds like the slower section doesn't belong in the piece.

I am assuming that you are a pianist based on your explanation of your compositional process. This is good. My final remark is that I encourage you to make sure that all your fast passagework (especially in the L.H.) is playable with logical, acceptable fingerings. I'm assuming it is, but far too many piano composers are satisfied with writing whatever notes they want and leaving it to the poor pianist to figure out later.

The main theme reminded me very much of the third movement of Rubinstein's 4th piano concerto in d minor. Have you heard it?

In generally, I think that this movement moved along very well. It is certainly very exciting and seems like it would be fun to perform. I would suggest however than you maybe make a few sections a little less "busy." Maybe cut down on some of the runs. For a first movement, it starts to drag on the listener a bit too much.

This is not Beethoven pastiche at all. Certainly it is in the romantic style, and romantically modeled in terms of form, but it does a lot of things that you could scour all of Beethoven's scores for and never find.

I think you misunderstood my use of the term "pastiche".

musically, pastiche does not mean using themes from, or elements from, another's work. it means "writing specifically in the style of".

My comment was meant as (in simpler terms) "I can hardly wait to hear music that is truly YOUR voice and YOUR harmony and not someone else's - in this case, Beethoven-ISH".

I don't know about other people, but I don't find it particularly flattering when someone tells me that one of my pieces "sounds like ". I understand the need for a listener to find references and a sort of aural roadmap, but the goal of a composer should not, generally speaking, be to sound like another composer.

Thanks, everyone, for the excellent constructive criticism. This is a wonderful forum. :-)

I think you misunderstood my use of the term "pastiche".

musically, pastiche does not mean using themes from, or elements from, another's work. it means "writing specifically in the style of".

My comment was meant as (in simpler terms) "I can hardly wait to hear music that is truly YOUR voice and YOUR harmony and not someone else's - in this case, Beethoven-ISH".

The term 'pastiche' has a 'nothing-new' connotation. You could use your definition of pastiche to call every single piece of music ever written pastiche. Every single piece of music ever written sounds like -pastiche, where x-composer is any number of composers that have influenced the composer in question. Calling a piece Beethoven-pastiche connotes that the piece is not merely in Beethoven's style, but is exclusively contained within the boundaries of what that composer did. Of course this piece is Beethoven-ish. But it also contains a lot of ideas that aren't so Beethoven.

Besides, what should it matter, anyway? We're all young composers, and if we find the impulse to write in the style of a certain composer for years on end, that's OK. At this point, I don't think that pointing out strong compositional influences should be thought of as a negative critique on a piece of music.

The term 'pastiche' has a 'nothing-new' connotation. You could use your definition of pastiche to call every single piece of music ever written pastiche. Every single piece of music ever written sounds like -pastiche, where x-composer is any number of composers that have influenced the composer in question. Calling a piece Beethoven-pastiche connotes that the piece is not merely in Beethoven's style, but is exclusively contained within the boundaries of what that composer did. Of course this piece is Beethoven-ish. But it also contains a lot of ideas that aren't so Beethoven.

Besides, what should it matter, anyway? We're all young composers, and if we find the impulse to write in the style of a certain composer for years on end, that's OK. At this point, I don't think that pointing out strong compositional influences should be thought of as a negative critique on a piece of music.

Well, some of us aren't quite so young ;)

What I was saying was that I am impressed by the solid technique displayed in this piece, and that I can hardly wait to hear what he will be doing when he has found his own unique voice.

As for your comment that "every single piece of music ever written sounds like...", well, I guess it depends on how you listen to music.

My thoughts are that the less you sound like someone else, and the more you have your own unique voice, the better. Of course, this only comes with time. And I certainly wasn't chastising this person for not having a unique voice. I fully understand where he's coming from. I myself at one point basically did the Bach-pastiche, then the Brahms-pastiche, the Debussy-sound-alike, and even the Boulez-sound-alike at one point. All composers go through that evolution as they learn their craft. Some composers don't find their own voice until late into their professional careers, some very early. Hell, Strawinski had multiple voices at multiple points in time!

very very fine and imposing composition!