# Piano Sonata: 1st Movement



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

Hey guys,

I started composing around 6 months ago, and this is my first piece that seems to be at the very least remotely aesthetic, all the other 20 or so being composition exercises. I spent a good deal on this piece, mostly on questions of developing while trying to also provide unity and variety. I also spend a lot on voice-leading, and also trying to provide a quasi-modern idiom, which comes out a bit in the 1st bars which are at least slightly polytonal but comes on and off. I had no intention to come off as reactionary, but I am trying to write in a more conventional language just because 1.) it's simpler and 2.) I want to follow the rules so I know what I'm doing when I'm breaking them. Hope you guys enjoy, any feedback no matter how harsh is greatly, greatly appreciated.

Piano Sonata: 1st Movement


----------



## Novelette (Dec 12, 2012)

SottoVoce, I liked your piano sonata movement.

There is a custom in notation, you might call it "notational courtesy", that you not place a note in a syncopated position that carries a duration longer than the value of the syncopation. In measure 15, you have the middle quarter note beginning in place of the fourth eighth note position, this is not a standard musical syntax because it can reduce legibility for the performer. All you need to do is break that quarter note into two tied eighth notes. Likewise with mm. 16 - 18.

There's a really easy rule of thumb with respect to this kind of thing, always clearly show the place where the second half of the measure begins. By tying two eighths, the player can see that the second of those eighths is the beginning of the second half of the measure, and is thereby well oriented to his or her position in the piece. You did this perfectly in measure 13! In the bass clef, you played the inverted B Major chord and followed it with a quarter rest, and then with a half rest. You can easily see the two halves of the measure. A dotted half rest could not have been placed in their place for this reason. Showing both halves can make the notation look a bit messy, but the performers will thank you!

...

You might also think about livening up the rhythmic motion of your work. You want to create tension in your work, to create a forward momentum of tones, harmonies, and rhythms that lead the listener to anticipate what is coming. In mm 1 - 18, there is a note being struck at every half-beat [eighth notes]. You may consider a little bit of diminution or augmentation [elaborated with the second voice]. Still, this is a purely aesthetic suggestion, there is no wrong way to write this. The most important compositional principle, in my opinion, is that you must like what you write. If people advise you to change something that you don't want to change, then you shouldn't change it.


----------



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

Thanks so much for the comments, Novelette. The notational problems are a great help; it has always been a considerably big problem for me, and it's very helpful to have someone point out some of the things that need fixing.

I greatly agree with you on working on the rhythmic variety of the piece, which I noticed before was lacking as well. What I think makes it at least a little better is - although the MIDI might not sound this very well - the 1st and 5th notes on every bar constitute a line, and thus while there is this eighth-note motion is going on, there is also a half note motion. Still not close to being rhythmically interesting, I agree. To tell you the truth, rhythm hasn't been something that has interested me (yet) but it's a vital part of the work and there needs to be something done about it. Thanks so much for the advice, I'll look at it and see if I could still retain some of the work with some rhythmic changes.


----------



## hreichgott (Dec 31, 2012)

This is an effective study in harmonies and sequences. It's nicely put together. The harmonies lead into each other in a logical way, and I can tell that you've been attentive to issues of voice leading. My reaction, which is certainly just the subjective reaction of one listener, is that this piece sounds like an accompaniment part for a melody which is not here. I could hear lines, but nothing that really jumped out as a melody or musical idea, other than the nice chord progression. Except perhaps for the few measures at the bottom of p. 2/top of p. 3 where the hands exchange single notes and rolled chords, but after a few measures the single notes go back to sounding like a bass line or descant part.

Not all music has to have melody; new age and ambient music is often built on pleasant chord progressions with little in the way of melody or motives. Even in the baroque style which you are imitating, there are exceptions to the rule of melody/ies, famously J. S. Bach's Prelude in C major from the Well-tempered Klavier book 1, and Solfeggietto by C. P. E. Bach. Those don't have a lot of rhythmic variation either, and yet they are works of genius. So if you like this method of composing you might have a look at scores for those pieces (even if you already know them well) to take apart the chord progressions and voice leading and see what you think constitutes the originality of those pieces.

Or maybe you might keep this piano part as an accompaniment, and create a melody in a solo instrument or vocal part(s)?

That said, I think that your piece is something to be proud of 6 months into composing. If one of my piano students brought this in after 6 months' composition practice I'd be thrilled. Keep up the good work in learning your "tools" (harmony etc), and don't let the tools get in the way of bringing out your individual voice.



SottoVoce said:


> the 1st and 5th notes on every bar constitute a line, and thus while there is this eighth-note motion is going on, there is also a half note motion.


P. S. There's also an interesting pattern going on with the 6th, 7th, 8th eighth notes in a measure leading into the 1st eighth note in the next measure. Speaking of Solfeggietto, it's not unlike the way the last three sixteenth notes in each measure lead into the next downbeat, in that piece.


----------



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

Thanks so much for the reply, hreichgott. I'm very glad that you caught on the athematic nature of the piece; I was inspired by the Beethoven's 30th piano sonata, which generally does not have a "good tune" so to speak, but is based on a chordal texture. It also explains why this piece seems to be very short for the first movement for a Piano Sonata; I'm leaving most of the "action" for the final movement, the Variations. So I would say that this is part intentional, but I also agree that while it may have not been troubling for Beethoven given his mastery of sonata form, it might be troubling for a beginning sonata like this. Not even adding the arrogance of being inspired as a beginner but one of the greatest achievements in piano music that is the 30th :lol: . 

The idea of keeping it as accompainement and adding a solo instrument is a very appealing one, and it would fix the problems a lot. After writing the second movement that will be something that will be on my mind. The comments are a lot of help, thanks so much.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

I think that the strong point of this piece is the way you managed to go from one section to another in a very effective and "smooth" way. 
I would say that it is needed a more interesting counterpoint, some sections with a more interesting rhythm, more chromatism (not in the sense of modern music, listen to the way in which Beethoven uses it, for example), and, maybe, the bar lines should be more "fuzzy" sometimes, otherwise it sounds always like a succesion of "blocks".
Anyway, if you have started only six months ago, it's pretty fine. Keep working.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

SottoVoce said:


> Thanks so much for the reply, hreichgott. I'm very glad that you caught on the athematic nature of the piece; I was inspired by the Beethoven's 30th piano sonata, which generally does not have a "good tune" so to speak, but is based on a chordal texture. It also explains why this piece seems to be very short for the first movement for a Piano Sonata; I'm leaving most of the "action" for the final movement, the Variations. So I would say that this is part intentional, but I also agree that while it may have not been troubling for Beethoven given his mastery of sonata form, it might be troubling for a beginning sonata like this. Not even adding the arrogance of being inspired as a beginner but one of the greatest achievements in piano music that is the 30th :lol: .
> 
> The idea of keeping it as accompainement and adding a solo instrument is a very appealing one, and it would fix the problems a lot. After writing the second movement that will be something that will be on my mind. The comments are a lot of help, thanks so much.


The very popular 'Ave Maria' by Charles Gounod was the result of a staple academic exercise at the music school he attended: Write a melody over the existing W.T.K. Book I Prelude in C! There is the 'extra' measure in the Gounod, present in the edition he worked from and present in some editions today, the current ones usually footnoting that particular measure as 'dubious' or 'optional.' Save it for later, long enough after that when you pick it up it may seem remote and as written by another, and pen a tune / descant over it for voice or instrument 

I generally agree with the comments of these other contributors, but take exception with the 'modernist' twist. The changes seem abrupt, and perhaps too close in my ear to sounding like a student did not quite get something 'right' within the harmonic context vs. something more deliberate and effective. They sit, then, rather like an 'I did not quite know were to go' or stumbled into interjections vs. surprising yet logical developments.

midi delivery or other, I found the rolled chords far too prominent, repeated or sounding over too great a span of time, ergo dulling after only a little bit. They also shatter any momentuum, perhaps not in the way you had anticipated. As an exercise, you might configure them, not necessarily adhering to their inversion as they now sit, and see if it betters or lessens those areas.

I repeat the very pleased and complimentary, "this is quite something for a beginner (you started teaching yourself, if I recall) and only after six months!" The will and drive are there; keep them up, and it will definitely develop further along lines that should satisfy you!


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

I like how it didn't have any wild swings and it was kept consistent all the way through. Reminds me a bit of Haydn.


----------



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

@aleazk: Thank you very much for your comment, aleazk. I'm a bit dissapointed you didn't think the counterpoint was strong enough; it was the main focus of the piece, but I think you do have a point with it being a bit bland. I think the rhythm might have a lot do with it as you said; it makes the counterpoint seem like a bunch of eighth notes trudging a lot. I also agree with the block comment, rhythm has been a thing I've been struggling with very long, mostly because in my listening experience it doesn't interest me very much, but it something that ought to I think, considering how interesting it. Thank you.

@PetrB: Thank you so much for your wisdom, PetrB. I'm glad you brought up the edigness of the harmonic sequence, because it is what my teacher brought up. I think it is partly from the fact that I write the music down mostly in contrapuntal terms, and don't have a lot of harmonic consideration in my thought. Do you think this would be fixed by setting down a kind of "blueprint", at least for now, where I would set up a harmonic progression before I wrote down anything? 

I feel like that might help somewhat, but it seems a little bit constricting; I think it would work much better as an exercise than anything I would do in a piece. The second theme is also I found a bit troubling, and as you said I don't think midi makes it any better. I agree that needs change.


@ScipioAfricanus: Thank you, because that was very much what I was going for; to keep it consistent and clear. The comparison to Haydn is a very generous compliment, thank you very much.

All of your comments have made me want to greatly reconsider this piece, and I think when I finish the Second and Third Movements (which I am working on now) I will defienetely look over and revise this one once more. As Brahms said however, a piece usually gets worse with revision. I'll still give it a shot though. Thank you all for your wonderful comments.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

SottoVoce said:


> @PetrB: Thank you.... I'm glad you brought up the edigness of the harmonic sequence, because it is what my teacher brought up. I think it is partly from the fact that I write the music down mostly in contrapuntal terms, and don't have a lot of harmonic consideration in my thought. *Do you think this would be fixed by setting down a kind of "blueprint", at least for now, where I would set up a harmonic progression before I wrote down anything? *


First, an aside. Your counterpoint is barely that, which sounds harsh in the light of how much you've accomplished and done from ground 0 only brief months ago, but must be said. What you've got is more in the realm of 'false counterpoint,' i.e. gives an illusion of....

Counterpoint or none, you have a good number of spots -- throughout -- where this fundamental mistake "sounds out as clearly as one sees a red barn in the middle of a green prairie": Octaves on strong beats: _there are sounding octaves on the first quarter, second quarters, etc. littered throughout, and they 'stick out like a sore thumb.'_ The principle is they are 'weak' and especially so butt naked as emphasized on strong beats 

Now, that chord progression thingy: I'm completely agin it, though some swear by it, and others find it very helpful. Especially if you are thinking primarily horizontally, that limits exactly where the piece 'might want to go.' Since you (and I) are not Mozart, with the entire work, and form, done in toto in mind before setting it down on paper, but instead get a kernel of an idea and then see where it leads, I believe that 'chord progression' is a lockdown and block of a preconception, a prejudging (translates to 'prejudice') which I would not want in front of me when sitting down to invent.

Conversely, as a discipline, at least working a sketch, without the exact rhythm of the chords (how long each is in play before a change) it might be helpful in keeping you 'on track' and going in a forward direction.

There is no hard and fast 'rule' about how long one harmony sounds before it shifts to another, while there is a well-recognized quality of 'harmonic rhythm,' being exactly how well a chord sounds in a particular duration before it is too brief, or too long. There is some 'catalogue' type listing of this phenomenon, by chord function, to be thought about but not taken as law.

After consulting with your teacher, natch, I would suggest that this piece, other than perhaps a few looks back to see what might be made better, is 'done.' You are a student, unlikely to come up with a work with little or no flaws, and what has been done here, the weaknesses pointed out and then understood, is best left behind. Start afresh, keeping those weaknesses or 'errors' in mind, and the next piece will be a new challenge, with some current 'problems' solved, or at least better solved, with, sorry, a whole new batch of weaknesses to learn about from round two

This piece is not in 'form' enough, imo, to extend or add movements and have the collective movements be either 'consistent' or really worthwhile. The somehow related several movements ambition should also be a project for 'later.'

You've done, again, amazingly well for a first time out after such a brief study. Congratulations.


----------



## SottoVoce (Jul 29, 2011)

PetrB said:


> First, an aside. Your counterpoint is barely that, which sounds harsh in the light of how much you've accomplished and done from ground 0 only brief months ago, but must be said. What you've got is more in the realm of 'false counterpoint,' i.e. gives an illusion of....
> 
> Counterpoint or none, you have a good number of spots -- throughout -- where this fundamental mistake "sounds out as clearly as one sees a red barn in the middle of a green prairie": Octaves on strong beats: _there are sounding octaves on the first quarter, second quarters, etc. littered throughout, and they 'stick out like a sore thumb.'_ The principle is they are 'weak' and especially so butt naked as emphasized on strong beats
> 
> ...


Thank you for the great insights, PetrB. I am very close to finishing the second movement of this piece, and I would love to post it on here soon and see what you and the TC community thinks. I think the Second Movement is much better, but I may also be wrong since I've been working on it for so long.


----------

