# Bassoon sonata



## Aramis

Not really a sonata yet, but here's something I started to compose and I'm not sure if I should continue this way. The bassoon part was added to something that was meant to be for piano solo. Now I'm not sure if I should keep writing it for two instruments or throw away the bassoon part (thought about making if french horn too) or should I join sifakas and dance. One thing you don't need to tell me is that transition after the bassoon enterance is very bad. It's just temporary hole filler after previous idea was abandoned, leaving three bars of silence.


__
https://soundcloud.com/uxopasoz%2Fdagf


----------



## Klavierspieler

Do you think you could upload a score? Sometimes the midi makes it a bit hard to know what's going on, especially with that low register of the piano. I think I like it, but it's hard to tell. 

I think you may indeed want to just cut the bassoon out and make it a solo piano piece. It sounds rather like a piano piece that had a bassoon part added in (surprise, surprise). You could probably add the bassoon part into the piano part if you tried.


----------



## Aramis

I'm attaching the score to this post, but be warned that it's rather messy right now.

Also, here is the sound sample of the piano part alone:

__
https://soundcloud.com/uxopasoz%2Fdzikefike


----------



## Klavierspieler

Well, one thing that comes to mind is that if you did decide to keep the bassoon, normally it would go above the piano. Also, some issues with dotted notes and chord spellings. Ummm... More detailed response to follow....


----------



## Mahlerian

Why does it begin with a major/minor chord in inversion with an extremely dissonant note in the bass? Why is there no key signature? Why does the bassoon move in similar motion from unison to minor second with one of the voices in the piano? Why is the bass range emphasized so much? Why does the piece seem to have no thematic or even rhythmic unity?

Maybe if you finished it these questions would be answered, but with a fragment like that, that's all I can offer.


----------



## shangoyal

To my ears, it sounded quite interesting actually. So I'd want you to finish it, any which way. I am not at all an expert so cannot offer any advice, but I kind of liked the bassoon bit too.


----------



## pluhagr

I wouldn't call this a bassoon sonata as it should emphasize the bassoon. I don't see the bassoon as adding anything to the piece really. If the piano was in the upper register the bassoon would sound nice in the bass as contrast.


----------



## PetrB

Best not to write anything if you think there is nothing to say... but what is here sounds like a near-random improv, sketches in a very early phase. I suppose that, too, is a function of this category as consulting with colleagues. [Myself, I would prefer to wait until something is more concretely in a shape before even consulting with a colleague.]

This is so open, as a series of improv preliminary sketches, that there is little to say until it has more of a distinct identity -- but we all take slightly different to disparate varied approaches to the same sort of problems 

Yes, I'll add my third motion to abandon the bassoon: it is an afterthought that, unless these sketches are extensively re-thought and re-worked, sounds like an afterthought.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

I actually think that with much careful editing this would make a very convincing slow introduction to a bassoon sonata movement (later on of course, I would advise using more bassoon). Tips: don't try to cram too many ideas into the intro. Eliminate anything unnecessary that isn't expanded upon in what you have written already. Also, don't make whatever you write after this in the same piece unrelated to the intro. By doing these things, using your material in a very conventional way, you would at least manage to come up with something that has thematic unity. 

Check out slow intros such as the beginning of Haydn's 103rd symphony. Not much happens in the first 39 bars at all when compared to the exposition which follows. We have a sorta improvised drumroll, a monophonic melody in 2 phrases, each very closely related and each ending with a harmonised cadence. Then we have the first phrase again, in a different register with a different accompaniment but essentially the same melody, then we have another variation on the phrase which leads to a bridge section, still thematically related to the original melody and elaborating on different intervals and fragments originating in that opening melody and still in a similar character, but here we have more complex harmonies that build to a variation of the very first motif in the exposition, but in the character of the introduction which is entirely different. Use some of the techniques already established to show you understand how they work.


----------



## Aramis

TANKS FOR RESPOSNSES



Mahlerian said:


> Why does it begin with a major/minor chord in inversion with an extremely dissonant note in the bass?


If you're refering to first audio link, I noticed if after posting - something happened with the software. The proper opening chord is to be hear in second link. If you have looked into the score and still have objection, I can only say that I see no reason not to begin with such chord - what could be possibly wrong with it? Regarding the dissonance it contains, it sounds much less severe when I play it on real piano.



> Why is there no key signature?


Because I'm not sure what should it be, although D minor comes to mind.



> Why is the bass range emphasized so much?


I wanted to begin heavily to create contrast with what is to come later.



> Why does the piece seem to have no thematic or even rhythmic unity?


Don't know about rhythmic unity but as far as the themes go, I think there are three distinguishable motives. The opening section is repeated after crescendal part with some elaboration, then a variation of the middle build-up is going to follow.



> I actually think that with much careful editing this would make a very convincing slow introduction to a bassoon sonata movement


I'm not sure if there will be anything like allegro di sonata following, so slow introduction is not exactly what it's supposed to be. I have concept of the whole thing more or less estabilished and so I wouldn't want to model it after classical symphony. Though I will surely re-listen to that Haydn and try to think of what you've suggested.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde

Aramis said:


> I'm not sure if there will be anything like allegro di sonata following, so slow introduction is not exactly what it's supposed to be. I have concept of the whole thing more or less estabilished and so I wouldn't want to model it after classical symphony. Though I will surely re-listen to that Haydn and try to think of what you've suggested.


Ah of course 
Best thing though, come up with a few very short ideas to string into a melody, and simple develop everything from there 
Too many ideas in a short space of time just makes the music feel disconnected.


----------



## Mahlerian

Aramis said:


> Because I'm not sure what should it be, although D minor comes to mind.


You mean that you wrote this music without thinking about how it works harmonically? Without intending to move towards an ultimate harmonic goal? No wonder it sounds like an unfocused improvisation.


----------



## Aramis

Mahlerian said:


> You mean that you wrote this music without thinking about how it works harmonically? Without intending to move towards an ultimate harmonic goal? No wonder it sounds like an unfocused improvisation.


I certainly had no tonal plan, the goal for me is almost always a "vanishing point". I make a step and decide where to go further basing on where the previous step has placed me. Of course it doesn't apply to all aspects of composition, but as far as harmonic and tonal direction goes, this is my alternative for what the theory dictates. I don't feel any lack of harmonic focus myself, but since you report it, I'll be sure to meditate on the issue.


----------



## arpeggio

*Confessions of a Fagottist*

To the above observations I would add the following:

One, in measure six having the bassoon and the piano playing together in the same low bass range will produce a muddy sound. It may work on a midi but not in a recital hall.

Two, in measure seven you are having the bassoon playing a low Db piano. Softly playing the notes below the bass clef on the bassoon can be a problem. Even playing a low Bb piano, the lowest note on the bassoon, can still sound like a flight of B-52 Bombers. Having the piano playing an octave higher and playing _mp_ may solve that balance problem.

Three, I have no problem with no key signature. I have played many 20th Century works where there is no key signature. Hindemith does not employ a key signature in his _Bassoon Sonata_.

Finally a small minor point. What is with treble clef? Most bassoon players can only read bass and treble clef. I know of some who have problems with the tenor clef. Starting out the bassoon part in the treble clef will just freak out some bassoon players.


----------



## DrKilroy

arpeggio said:


> Starting out the bassoon part in the treble clef will just freak out some bassoon players.


Tell it to Stravinsky. 

Best regards, Dr


----------



## arpeggio

*Rite of Spring*



DrKilroy said:


> Tell it to Stravinsky.
> 
> Best regards, Dr


I know about the part. I actually had the opportunity to play the solo once. It is written in the tenor clef.






​
I have very rarely seen a bassoon part written in treble clef. Whenever I have it would be in a 20th century or contemporary piece.


----------



## PetrB

Mahlerian said:


> You mean that you wrote this music without thinking about how it works harmonically? Without intending to move towards an ultimate harmonic goal? No wonder it sounds like an unfocused improvisation.


One does not need to start out knowing the end goal, but this does result in that "sketch / unfocused / collection of bits stuff, which can be and is for some the MO to find their way to the piece... and decide somewhere along the way, preferably sooner than later, the "end goal."

But some _point of view_ on the material itself must be bravely adopted / adapted -- and / or some stance taken and pretty much held to -- before a piece becomes a piece.


----------



## PetrB

-----------------------------------------------------


----------



## DrKilroy

arpeggio said:


> I know about the part. I actually had the opportunity to play the solo once. It is written in the tenor clef.
> 
> I have very rarely seen a bassoon part written in treble clef. Whenever I have it would be in a 20th century or contemporary piece.


Uh-oh, sorry! I misread your message, I thought you actually discouraged from using the tenor clef, what seemed rather weird...  But I see now. 

Best regards, Dr


----------



## BurningDesire

It doesn't sound unfocused to me. Maybe improvisatory, but when has that ever been a bad thing? Ives' second piano sonata sounds improvised often, and its one of the best pieces ever written o3o

I get a heavy jazz vibe from this, and I like the harmonies you used Aramis. Also, just because its a bassoon sonata doesn't mean you have to shove the bassoon in the listener's ears constantly guys. I like the presense it has so far in the piece, its like an important figure lurking in the shadows, cloaked. Aramis, please continue to work on at least this movement. I think this will be a great piece if you do. There's alot of great dramatic potential, alot more you can do later with the bassoon (its good to not blow your musical load early). Seriously, I wanna hear what you can make of this piece.


----------

