# Constructive Criticism Needed Please!!



## Bevo (Feb 22, 2015)

I'm probably on the wrong board for this so I apologize in advance, but I'm in dire need of some help here. I'm self-taught in music theory. I was originally going to get a degree in music composition, but changed my mind considering the odds of me being able to land a job in the market. Anyways, other than singing in Choir for several years I've never played an instrument, but have studied countless scores to develop my understanding of composition. Anyways, I feel this recent piece I wrote is a little bit of a break-through for me in terms of developing a more mature style. Anyways, I can never get anyone to listen to my pieces but a friend or two and my family, and obviously they all feel pressured to tell me it's good and all. But that's not what I'm after. The only way I can learn is via constructive criticism, so would some of you please take a listen and help me out so I can continue to improve with each future composition? What did I do good...? What should I work on...? That sort of thing. I'm looking for more professional advice that isn't afraid of hurting my feelings. Thanks.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Overall, you have done a pretty good job of imitating the Classical style (though I agree with all of Vasks' criticisms below). Can you do other styles? If not, you should work on that rather than attempting to perfect this one.

But a few specifics:

- Some of the transitions are awkward, especially in the exposition.
- In that connection, you should emphasize the turn to the dominant much more strongly than you do, so that the key is more firmly established.
- When the second theme returns in the development, we spend too long on it in the same key. It was again reached awkwardly, and yet you treat it as stable for a relatively long time.
- The retransition is better than the earlier transition to the dominant, but still on the abrupt side, and from a thematic point of view it might be better to have some additional motivic work done to round off the development.

More generally, you should work a bit on voice leading and on creating additional contrapuntal interest in homophonic textures.

Lastly, a quibble about the name. If you're just writing a single movement, you should probably call it "Allegro" or some such rather than Sonatina.


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

I listened to the first 3 minutes and while there's much to enjoy in the Allegro, your introduction is very uninteresting. There's way too many pauses (yes, I get it that that's part of its design, but the design is flawed), the piano part is too thin, there's too many tonic chords and the rhythms are too square/simplistic.

A good number of posters here on Today's Composers are like you in that they wish to imitate the Classical period style. I still don't get it, but if that's all you want to do, then look to your Allegro. Much of it works, but chord progressions tend to be just a few diatonic ones. You need a bit more different choices including a chromatic one here and there (secondary dominant, Neapolitan sixth, etc like Mozart does). Finally the start of the new phrase (1:38 mark) stretches its opening chord too long and sits on it though 1:46. That's way too stagnant.


----------



## Bevo (Feb 22, 2015)

Vasks said:


> I listened to the first 3 minutes and while there's much to enjoy in the Allegro, your introduction is very uninteresting. There's way too many pauses (yes, I get it that that's part of its design, but the design is flawed), the piano part is too thin, there's too many tonic chords and the rhythms are too square/simplistic.
> 
> A good number of posters here on Today's Composers are like you in that they wish to imitate the Classical period style. I still don't get it, but if that's all you want to do, then look to your Allegro. Much of it works, but chord progressions tend to be just a few diatonic ones. You need a bit more different choices including a chromatic one here and there (secondary dominant, Neapolitan sixth, etc like Mozart does). Finally the start of the new phrase (1:38 mark) stretches its opening chord too long and sits on it though 1:46. That's way too stagnant.


First off, thank you very much for your your input and advice. These are all things I will most definitely work on! Two quick questions though. I don't think I fully understand what it is you're saying when you mention the phrase at 1:38. Any chance of elaborating a little for me? And secondly, one of my major weaknesses is simply using chromatic chords. I just have a hard time hearing them in my head and I feel as though they are too abrupt and mess up phrases when I attempt them (except for the Neapolitan sixth in a minor key). When I look for tricks to use them online most sites give advice for modern songs, and while it works sometimes it often has a different effect than how classical composers used them. So do you have any suggestions for implementing these types of chords? Thanks again and I appreciate your help.


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

About the chord stretching from 1:38-1:46: The first half is a phrase on the dominant chord, then the piano repeats the dominant chord while the clarinet is added on top. The reason why it's too much is that once a dominant chord is extended out and then stops, it needs to move on not repeat itself. And while I'm at this spot, the clarinet added on top contains some poorly placed non-chord tones (in other words, the clarinet needs more important notes of the dominant chord and less of the non-chord tones).

As for using Chromatic chords like Borrowed, Neapolitan sixth & Secondary leading tone/dominants. It's a matter of (1) using correct voice leading (which all theory books teach well) and (2) realizing they substitute for their diatonic counterparts (for example in the key of C major if your chord progression is I-IV-V, then instead of IV you could sub (1) a borrowed minor iv (2) a N6 (3) a viio/V (4) V7/V.


----------



## Truckload (Feb 15, 2012)

It's a nice piece. I agree with all of Mahlerian's and Vasks specific advice. I do believe there is much to be gained by writing in a High Classical style, even if you eventually write in other styles. First, like any other human activity, composition skills require practice. Writing in the High Classical style is a very effective way to internalize harmonic, melodic and contrapuntal concepts that will serve a composer well in any style. The High Classical style is particularly good as a learning tool because anything clumsy will stand out, and there are so many excellent examples for reference.

The use of the sequence, and the bass line moving by step, will help you find interesting harmonies.


----------



## Samuel Kristopher (Nov 4, 2015)

I agree with that. A lot of my really early experiments involved trying to imitate that style, and it's not as easy as it sounds!


----------



## Truckload (Feb 15, 2012)

Samuel Kristopher said:


> I agree with that. A lot of my really early experiments involved trying to imitate that style, and it's not as easy as it sounds!


I agree, it is not as easy as some might think. I have also composed in the High Classical style as a means to expand my skills. It really helped me. Not that I would now say that I could write something great. But it did help me get better, and helped me discover more than I anticipated.


----------

