# Sonata for String Quintet



## soundandfury (Jul 12, 2008)

Sonata for String Quintet (score)

Here "quintet" = quartet + double bass. The 'cello and bass are pizzicato throughout, and most of the solos are in the viola. The development is more harmonically adventurous than most of my works, and in places sounds a little strained - I can modulate to the dominant easily, but I always struggle to get back to the tonic afterwards.

As always, apologies for the dubious quality of the realisation.

/me waits for someone to tell me it's not a sonata...


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I don't think you need to worry about people saying it's not a sonata, as Henry Purcell wrote similar pieces called sonatas. What I would say it needs more of is variety and direction, variety especially. Maybe you should try changing the texture (not having the cellos and basses pluck the entire time). Try changing the key too. I don't know what you are referring to when you refer to "harmonically adventurous" but it stayed in a pretty conventional g minor the entire time (not even sure if I heard a diminished or augmented triad). But ya, try to at least have a modulation somewhere in there.

Anyway, some of the melodic ideas are pretty good. Keep working at it!


----------



## soundandfury (Jul 12, 2008)

violadude said:


> I don't think you need to worry about people saying it's not a sonata, as Henry Purcell wrote similar pieces called sonatas.


That was actually a reference to the argument about a month back about my Symphony No. 1, to whose title a number of commenters objected.


> What I would say it needs more of is variety and direction, variety especially. Maybe you should try changing the texture (not having the cellos and basses pluck the entire time).


I did consider it, but I couldn't get a transition to fit anywhere.


> Try changing the key too. I don't know what you are referring to when you refer to "harmonically adventurous" but it stayed in a pretty conventional g minor the entire time (not even sure if I heard a diminished or augmented triad). But ya, try to at least have a modulation somewhere in there.


There is actually a modulation to D minor, and there are a number of places where the choice of chords is, perhaps not adventurous from a Late Romantic or 20th century standpoint, but musically I still live in the Baroque era, where men were men and G minor was G minor, not a sharp above nor a flat below. That phrase "harmonically adventurous" did actually appear in a comparative: most of my compositions are even more resolutely tonic than this one. I'm not very good at modulations, and even slightly unorthodox harmonies sound strange to me (III in a minor is ok, but iii in a major is pushing it and ii[sup]dim[/sup] in a minor is right out).


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

soundandfury said:


> That was actually a reference to the argument about a month back about my Symphony No. 1, to whose title a number of commenters objected.
> 
> I did consider it, but I couldn't get a transition to fit anywhere.
> 
> There is actually a modulation to D minor, and there are a number of places where the choice of chords is, perhaps not adventurous from a Late Romantic or 20th century standpoint, but musically I still live in the Baroque era, where men were men and G minor was G minor, not a sharp above nor a flat below. That phrase "harmonically adventurous" did actually appear in a comparative: most of my compositions are even more resolutely tonic than this one. I'm not very good at modulations, and even slightly unorthodox harmonies sound strange to me (III in a minor is ok, but iii in a major is pushing it and ii[sup]dim[/sup] in a minor is right out).


Who are your compositional influences then?


----------



## Nix (Feb 20, 2010)

soundandfury said:


> That was actually a reference to the argument about a month back about my Symphony No. 1, to whose title a number of commenters objected.


Don't listen to them. The literal definition of 'sonata' means 'sounding' and it was first used to describe instrumental works. So as long as you aren't writing vocal pieces that aren't in sonata form, feel free to call anything you want a 'Sonata.'


----------



## soundandfury (Jul 12, 2008)

violadude said:


> Who are your compositional influences then?


Largely Haydn, Händel and Hummel, and several other Baroque guys (eg. Telemann, Stanley). I listen to plenty of later stuff (about as far as Tchaik and Shosta, but not Stravinsky and I don't really get on with Rach), but I can't successfully emulate them - I simply can't do what they did. As for Bach, the only piece of his I know well enough to absorb ideas from is Brandenburg 4 mvt 1, which has to be one of my all-time favourites. Also, I learned harmony by filling in the ATB of Bach 4-part chorales, and the rules for those still tend to guide my writing.

However, I'm not _consciously_ influenced by what I listen to; I don't set out to write a pastiche of any particular composer's style, instead I just put down a few bars of a theme or an accompaniment, and then solve harmonic and melodic optimisation problems until the piece is long enough. Sometimes (as in this case) I make a conscious decision as to form, but often I just produce an unstructured stream of music that can only be called a 'fantasia' or a 'rhapsody'.


----------



## soundandfury (Jul 12, 2008)

Nix said:


> Don't listen to them. The literal definition of 'sonata' means 'sounding' and it was first used to describe instrumental works. So as long as you aren't writing vocal pieces that aren't in sonata form, feel free to call anything you want a 'Sonata.'


I know that. The remark in the OP was _meant_ to be a wry joke.


----------

