# Instances for Piano Trio- Movement I



## pluhagr (Jan 2, 2012)

Here's the first movement in my piano trio. Any comments would be much appreciated. The score and sound file are linked. Enjoy!

Score:
http://issuu.com/pluhagr/docs/instance_i_-_full_score

Music:

__
https://soundcloud.com/thecontemporary%2Ffirst-instance


----------



## Ravndal (Jun 8, 2012)

This sounds very nice, thank you for sharing.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

I thought it was good. I particularly enjoyed the colorful interaction between the viola and the clarinet.
Your score is very clean also and visually pleasing, I noticed that you often comment about this. 

I have an observation, though: the piano part. All the action in this movement is in the interaction between the viola and the clarinet. Rhythmically and harmonically, all the information is already in those parts, the piano serves only to reinforce and clarify that. In your dynamical marks, you give too much prominence to the piano. That's heard in the piece, and can be annoying, since it really has nothing much to add. I would send it to the background of the texture, and maybe bring it back when there are changes in the harmony, for immediately send it to the background again. Even with all this, the piano part is still a little monotonous. I found the constant hammering over only the middle register as exasperating. At roughly the middle part of the piece a variation in the register is needed, I think. You can go back to the middle register, but a relief from that initial texture is needed.
Also, maybe the two hands can stop playing simultaneously at some moments. A small phase difference can add great intensity to the rhythm (check Ligeti's piano étude Fem). I noticed you made this bewteen the pulse of the piano and the clarinet for example, but it's not enough because of the two hands thing, and sometimes they are even already contained in the viola part, as I mentioned.
So basically, I think you should color a little more the piano part in terms of register, rhythm, and dynamics. Otherwise, we hear only two interacting layers, the viola and the clarinet, with someone behind marking superfluously very obvious accentuations and changes, with occasional phase differences (which actually serves as a true interaction between the piano and the other instruments), yes, but still are not enough for removing that marking flavor.


----------



## pluhagr (Jan 2, 2012)

aleazk said:


> I thought it was good. I particularly enjoyed the colorful interaction between the viola and the clarinet.
> Your score is very clean also and visually pleasing, I noticed that you often comment about this.
> 
> I have an observation, though: the piano part. All the action in this movement is in the interaction between the viola and the clarinet. Rhythmically and harmonically, all the information is already in those parts, the piano serves only to reinforce and clarify that. In your dynamical marks, you give too much prominence to the piano. That's heard in the piece, and can be annoying, since it really has nothing much to add. I would send it to the background of the texture, and maybe bring it back when there are changes in the harmony, for immediately send it to the background again. Even with all this, the piano part is still a little monotonous. I found the constant hammering over only the middle register as exasperating. At roughly the middle part of the piece a variation in the register is needed, I think. You can go back to the middle register, but a relief from that initial texture is needed.
> ...


Thanks for your comments! I agree that the piano is quite overpowering and i definitely like your idea of phasing between the hands. I should say that in each of these movements I am trying to show a particular instrument or sets of instruments. So, this one is viola and clarinet, while the third one is the piano. That being said I should keep the piano down in this piece as you can't hear the other duo. Again, thanks for your comments and criticisms.


----------

