# Piano Sonata No. 4 in A major, Op. 3



## StevenOBrien

Seeing as a lot of my works are quite long and take a lot of time to listen to, I decided I'd write something relatively short and condensed for people that don't have a lot of time on their hands. I was initially considering calling it a sonatina due to its length, but after finishing it, it felt much "heavier" than what I'd normally consider a sonatina. What do you guys think with regards to this?

*Listen on Soundcloud: *

__
https://soundcloud.com/stevenobrien%2Fsets

*Score (PDF): *
http://steven-obrien.net/Piano Sonata No. 4 in A major, Op. 3.pdf

*Score (Sibelius): *
http://steven-obrien.net/Piano Sonata No. 4 in A major, Op. 3.sib

I look forward to hearing your feedback!
-Steven


----------



## MaestroViolinist

Very nice! The first movement is fun to listen, and the second is nice, kind of short but that's just me. And I like the very ending.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Funny how it's your fourth piano sonata, but your third opus number.


----------



## StevenOBrien

ComposerOfAvantGarde said:


> Funny how it's your fourth piano sonata, but your third opus number.


Why is that funny?  The first three sonatas are a single opus.



MaestroViolinist said:


> Very nice! The first movement is fun to listen, and the second is nice, kind of short but that's just me. And I like the very ending.


Thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed it!


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

StevenOBrien said:


> Why is that funny?  The first three sonatas are a single opus.


Ah well that makes sense then.


----------



## SeanDamon

This is an exciting piece, loaded with melodic and rhythmic vitality. It sounds like something that would be as fun to play as it is to hear.

The only thing that struck me as at all negative is at the end of the second movement where I feel as if I am being invited into a mysterious realm that contrasts beautifully with the highly animated quality of the sonata. Although that does not happen, the piece does not suffer for it.

Bravo!


----------



## Romantic Geek

I like them, but I must provide some critical feedback for pondering:

1) I'm not really a big fan of your voicing of the left hand. It's very Beethovenian...and unfortunately, the way pianos are built today, it's going to sound incredibly muddy. Specifically, places like measures 9-10 in the first movement. I don't think it's going to sound very crisp. Which brings me to point #2

2) Now, the first movement is very much in the manner of Beethoven. The second movement is less so but could be convincing. The third movement just does not fit the style. It's a wonderful movement, but not with the first two that you wrote. At least, that's my opinion. Where I was going with this though was your liberal disregard for things like parallel fifths and octaves and unresolved dominant-sevenths (measures 9 in the first movement proves part of my point). If you were aiming for a more genuine classical style, it would be best to better craft these lines so they aren't so disjunct.

3) In general, I think you're asking the pianist a lot for the stretch of their hand. The first movement is pretty much OK (maybe a few questionable spots), but the second and third movements need a lot of help in this regard. Measure 9 of the 2nd movement, a major tenth between a white note and a black note. That's a pretty large range that I think most pianists probably don't have comfortably (although the best ones will have ways of disguising it). I'd personally probably roll it very quickly, but if this spacing may provide an undesired effect (possibly). 

The left hand in the first measure (notated m. 53) at the speed you notated is really really difficult (M10 followed by m10 followed by P11 and repeat). M. 73, that voicing in the left hand is practically impossible and would even be insanely difficult to roll it while keeping the piece at tempo. This may be a good point to say that the filled in chords in octaves in eighth notes may prove to be something only the most advanced pianists will be able to accomplish. It would be much easier to play if one of the octave notes (probably the lower one) is just removed.

In conclusion, I think there are just issues with this as a piano work. I don't remember you saying what your instrument was when we first conversed. However, as a pianist and one who has composed a fair share of piano parts, I know how extremely difficult it is to write for the instrument. The piece sounds pianistic, but it really isn't written pianistically. I think there are many unnecessary doublings and quirky voicings that will end up giving a pianist more trouble than is necessary to portray what you are intending. So in short, I like a lot of what you do with melody, rhythms, harmony. I'm just getting picky with the actual orchestration (yes, writing for solo piano is orchestration!) with the work.

P.S. Definitely a sonatina! The development in the 1st movement is so characteristic for developments in sonatinas (especially in that Beethovenian style you're writing in).


----------



## StevenOBrien

SeanDamon said:


> This is an exciting piece, loaded with melodic and rhythmic vitality. It sounds like something that would be as fun to play as it is to hear.
> 
> The only thing that struck me as at all negative is at the end of the second movement where I feel as if I am being invited into a mysterious realm that contrasts beautifully with the highly animated quality of the sonata. Although that does not happen, the piece does not suffer for it.
> 
> Bravo!


Thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed it. As for the strangeness of the end of the second movement, it _should_ make more sense when you listen closely to the latter half of the third movement.



Romantic Geek said:


> I like them, but I must provide some critical feedback for pondering:
> 
> 1) I'm not really a big fan of your voicing of the left hand. It's very Beethovenian...and unfortunately, the way pianos are built today, it's going to sound incredibly muddy. Specifically, places like measures 9-10 in the first movement. I don't think it's going to sound very crisp. Which brings me to point #2
> 
> 2) Now, the first movement is very much in the manner of Beethoven. The second movement is less so but could be convincing. The third movement just does not fit the style. It's a wonderful movement, but not with the first two that you wrote. At least, that's my opinion. Where I was going with this though was your liberal disregard for things like parallel fifths and octaves and unresolved dominant-sevenths (measures 9 in the first movement proves part of my point). If you were aiming for a more genuine classical style, it would be best to better craft these lines so they aren't so disjunct.
> 
> 3) In general, I think you're asking the pianist a lot for the stretch of their hand. The first movement is pretty much OK (maybe a few questionable spots), but the second and third movements need a lot of help in this regard. Measure 9 of the 2nd movement, a major tenth between a white note and a black note. That's a pretty large range that I think most pianists probably don't have comfortably (although the best ones will have ways of disguising it). I'd personally probably roll it very quickly, but if this spacing may provide an undesired effect (possibly).
> 
> The left hand in the first measure (notated m. 53) at the speed you notated is really really difficult (M10 followed by m10 followed by P11 and repeat). M. 73, that voicing in the left hand is practically impossible and would even be insanely difficult to roll it while keeping the piece at tempo. This may be a good point to say that the filled in chords in octaves in eighth notes may prove to be something only the most advanced pianists will be able to accomplish. It would be much easier to play if one of the octave notes (probably the lower one) is just removed.
> 
> In conclusion, I think there are just issues with this as a piano work. I don't remember you saying what your instrument was when we first conversed. However, as a pianist and one who has composed a fair share of piano parts, I know how extremely difficult it is to write for the instrument. The piece sounds pianistic, but it really isn't written pianistically. I think there are many unnecessary doublings and quirky voicings that will end up giving a pianist more trouble than is necessary to portray what you are intending. So in short, I like a lot of what you do with melody, rhythms, harmony. I'm just getting picky with the actual orchestration (yes, writing for solo piano is orchestration!) with the work.
> 
> P.S. Definitely a sonatina! The development in the 1st movement is so characteristic for developments in sonatinas (especially in that Beethovenian style you're writing in).


1) Hmm, because the intervals are so small? I've been under the impression that this wouldn't really be a problem until you entered the octave below it. I can't think of any other way to voice these chords. It will sound far too "large" if I move the middle notes in each chord up an octave, and it will sound too open if I remove them altogether. *sigh*

2) I'm not trying to imitate anyone or be "authentic"! I'm sure there's definitely some Beethovenian influence in this piece, but it's not a case where I'm trying to write as the great master himself would. If the third movement doesn't sound like something that he would go for, it's not a problem, it all works together in my ears. As for technical errors, I'm working on studying harmony and I'm trying to do those dreaded Bach chorale exercises whenever I can bring myself to do it, but it's just so much more fun to compose actual music that I can never get away from it. I really need discipline >_<. Do you have any advice on how to make harmonic studies more enjoyable?

3) I'll have another look through it and see if I can refine the large intervals any further. Thanks!

Thank you so much for your feedback, I really appreciate it!


----------



## Romantic Geek

StevenOBrien said:


> Thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed it. As for the strangeness of the end of the second movement, it _should_ make more sense when you listen closely to the latter half of the third movement.
> 
> 1) Hmm, because the intervals are so small? I've been under the impression that this wouldn't really be a problem until you entered the octave below it. I can't think of any other way to voice these chords. It will sound far too "large" if I move the middle notes in each chord up an octave, and it will sound too open if I remove them altogether. *sigh*


Try playing it on a real piano if you get the chance. The larger the piano though, the muddier it will sound. So on that concert grand (which I hope you want this piece featured on  ) it's going to be pretty muddly. It is because of the full chord. Blame well-tempered tuning and the overtone series (and the invention of the pedal) 



> 2) I'm not trying to imitate anyone or be "authentic"! I'm sure there's definitely some Beethovenian influence in this piece, but it's not a case where I'm trying to write as the great master himself would. If the third movement doesn't sound like something that he would go for, it's not a problem, it all works together in my ears. As for technical errors, I'm working on studying harmony and I'm trying to do those dreaded Bach chorale exercises whenever I can bring myself to do it, but it's just so much more fun to compose actual music that I can never get away from it. I really need discipline >_<. Do you have any advice on how to make harmonic studies more enjoyable?


Ha, I know what you mean! Well, let's put it this way, I think you conception of harmonic structure and progressions is quite superb. The next thing is then making sure that the melody is that...a melody. Even Beethoven (who in my opinion didn't write great melodies like Mozart) still had that great concept of counterpoint that really made everything work. Simple things like sevenths in the dominant seventh always resolve down (and maybe in an inner voice...oh and there's one exception to that, but I think you'll happen upon it if you got good counterpoint  ). So several times when you have dominant sevenths, that seventh just hangs and doesn't really resolve anywhere...thus it will sound like the dissonance stays there. Since your concept of harmony is so good, I really think you'd benefit from a counterpoint book rather than looking at Bach chorales. May I suggest Salzer and Schachter's "Counterpoint in Composition?" It's a very good approach to 18th-century counterpoint and I think it'll really smooth your melodies (i.e. soprano and bass lines). And with that, the music will be that much more cohesive and that much more convincing.

Like I said, I think this piece is good and has much potential. Please keep working on it!


----------



## ScipioAfricanus

finally a modern composer who isn't afraid to compose music.


----------



## StevenOBrien

Romantic Geek said:


> Ha, I know what you mean! Well, let's put it this way, I think you conception of harmonic structure and progressions is quite superb. The next thing is then making sure that the melody is that...a melody. Even Beethoven (who in my opinion didn't write great melodies like Mozart) still had that great concept of counterpoint that really made everything work. Simple things like sevenths in the dominant seventh always resolve down (and maybe in an inner voice...oh and there's one exception to that, but I think you'll happen upon it if you got good counterpoint  ). So several times when you have dominant sevenths, that seventh just hangs and doesn't really resolve anywhere...thus it will sound like the dissonance stays there. Since your concept of harmony is so good, I really think you'd benefit from a counterpoint book rather than looking at Bach chorales. May I suggest Salzer and Schachter's "Counterpoint in Composition?" It's a very good approach to 18th-century counterpoint and I think it'll really smooth your melodies (i.e. soprano and bass lines). And with that, the music will be that much more cohesive and that much more convincing.
> 
> Like I said, I think this piece is good and has much potential. Please keep working on it!


Thank you so much, I'll definitely look into that book.



ScipioAfricanus said:


> finally a modern composer who isn't afraid to compose music.


Heh. Diatonicism with classical form is just one approach of many to music (and one that I unfortunately seem to get bullied for in some circles for "driving music backwards"), but there's many other wonderful approaches to music that we certainly shouldn't dismiss just because they don't speak to us two as much as D+CF does! I, for one, love early modern music and minimalist music, and even some atonal music!


----------



## Billy

Pretty good Steven O'Brien. Nice work!


----------



## StevenOBrien

Billy said:


> Pretty good Steven O'Brien. Nice work!


Thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed it .


----------



## beetzart

I enjoyed this sonata, Steven. May I say it reminds me somewhat of Mendelssohn, in a good way of course! The nippy pace of the 1st movement is effective, although I was hoping for a more contrasting 2nd subject in a relative minor key, perhaps. The last movement is my favourite, with nice use of dynamics, subtle chromaticism, and well placed tonicisations. 

Overall, worthy of a concert hall performance any day!


----------



## StevenOBrien

beetzart said:


> I enjoyed this sonata, Steven. May I say it reminds me somewhat of Mendelssohn, in a good way of course! The nippy pace of the 1st movement is effective, although I was hoping for a more contrasting 2nd subject in a relative minor key, perhaps. The last movement is my favourite, with nice use of dynamics, subtle chromaticism, and well placed tonicisations.
> 
> Overall, worthy of a concert hall performance any day!


Hehe, hopefully someday. Thanks for listening!


----------

