# Sonata No. 1 in D minor, Op. 2



## Pennypacker

This is my second composition, a one-movement sonata. The style is different from my first work in harmonic language and development, it relies more on motifs. 
My mediocre piano skills can't exactly reflect how I would like it to sound, and the recording was done in some haste. Hopefully I'll get a better one later.

Here's the score.

Notes, compliments, scorn or death threats, all much appreciated.


----------



## ricardo_jvc6

Reminds me of Prokofiev somehow. Death Threats appreciated? Are you insane or sane...? Your "Piano Skills" doesn't matter to me, only if the composition itself is good in terms of theory or sound and how a composer tries to play it. That is what I care.


----------



## Pennypacker

I though sarcasm is an international thing. Not entirely sure about being sane though. 
So now that I know you can put aside my horrible pianism, what say thou about the piece?


----------



## ricardo_jvc6

Pennypacker said:


> I though sarcasm is an international thing. Not entirely sure about being sane though.
> So now that I know you can put aside my horrible pianism, what say thou about the piece?


The piece is good, I like the harmonies changes. It sounds very Impressionism and Contemporary(sure it is). Lots of modulations and awkward harmonies! I love your work in general. I am honest to say, I prefer this piece of piano rather than your rhapsody. Congrats


----------



## Pennypacker

Thanks, glad you enjoyed it. I also prefer it, I think today's me is a much better composer than two-months-ago me.


----------



## Forte

My thoughts: I think you should write more movements. I kind of hear the same ideas in the same style for the duration of the one movement, and they're very nice ideas, but they're not so contrasted from each other that the single movement stands well as a work - for examples, I think of Lisztian symphonic poems.

Of course that's just my opinion and that might be your only intention for this particular "sonata".


----------



## Pennypacker

Well I'm currently in a learning process, so I just wanted to write in a sonata form. I might come back to this later, although I'll probably prefer to just start a new idea. 
I think my performance is to blame for not hearing the contrast. But overall it's meant to be a pretty dark piece, and even the "happy" is temporary, escalating back to that agitated state. 

Thanks for listening!


----------



## Billy

I think it would sound good in a kind of duet with a violin too. Maybe you will consider a piece like that one day. I listened to all of it and enjoyed it. You brought out some nice ideas, and played them well.


----------



## StevenOBrien

Don't really have any feedback to give currently, but I just wanted to say that I thoroughly enjoyed it . Any more movements coming up?


----------



## Pennypacker

Then come back when you have something to say! :devil: Just kidding. As I replied to Forte, I might come back to this and add movements, but for now I want to experiment with different forms (next project - theme and variations).


----------



## Musician

To me this music says nothing. You gotta love a piece from the very beginning, a certain spark that connects you to the piece, but this has not happened. I think the problem has to do with the fact that you just wanted to compose something, but it has no soul. I don't think that it can be fixed, I believe you have to think about a winning beginning, something that will catch the listener by the ear and tell him, 'hey buddy you better listen to me or else'!...

For a study its a cool thing, but for this been a serious piece of music or art, its not there yet.


----------



## Pennypacker

I think the problem is it has no Saul. :tiphat:


----------



## Yardrax

I thought it was very good. A million miles away from the 6547th rate imitation Mozart that I was cranking out when I started composing, so by my meager standards anyway, also technically impressive. Also very much appreciate that you played the piano yourself.

Minor quibble about the naming - I personally find it a bit grating to see 'Op. 2' as the subtitle of an unpublished piece. First because Opus numbers were given to published pieces (Brahms Sonata no. 1 is not his first sonata composition but it bears the title Op. 1 because it was first in order of publishing) and also because it isn't a convention to assign Opus numbers for modern composers.

On the piece itself I think the people asking for more movements are missing the mark a little, the piece needs more variation, but you need to work on this within the piece as it stands. Personally to me it started to feel a bit samey halfway through, until the character changed to that of a March towards the end, IMO you need to work on incorporating more changes of character and texture within the course of the piece itself, tacking extra movements on the end won't improve the thing as it stands


----------



## ricardo_jvc6

Musician said:


> To me this music says nothing. You gotta love a piece from the very beginning, a certain spark that connects you to the piece, but this has not happened. I think the problem has to do with the fact that you just wanted to compose something, but it has no soul. I don't think that it can be fixed, I believe you have to think about a winning beginning, something that will catch the listener by the ear and tell him, 'hey buddy you better listen to me or else'!...
> 
> For a study its a cool thing, but for this been a serious piece of music or art, its not there yet.


I don't agree with Musician(Saul). This statement I don't agree (Sorry for being blunt).

Here is the reason why...

You are trying to say that his song has no soul incorporated. How can you manage to say that? Just by listening to it? Sure, there might be something involved but how about the writting? Maybe for you it has no soul. It goes the same thing for Baroque. Baroque is very technique-perfection based. The right tempo, the right notes and the right technique. Sometimes it captures the mood of the listener. Because it is all played with same rythym for the whole piece (if it needs to) and they might get bored of listening.

Furthermore, you can't control artists they have their own unique art. They work their own way. But never, EVER, tell a musician to do something that sounds right to you. It is very arrogant and snob posture for me and I hate those type of people. Pennypacker decided to do go for this type of music and I am happy for him and it is a great the piece. I can feel the emotions he described and I liked it.

"'hey buddy you better listen to me or else'!..." Threats are souless and meanless things to say to a composer. They are the ones working.

Althought, I don't want to cause any problem with you Saul, but you have to respect Pennypacker decision. A proper "ARTIST" will listen to his own thoughts, even thou don't like it. (Sorry for being blunt again)


----------



## Musician

That's a little far fetched...



Pennypacker said:


> I think the problem is it has no Saul. :tiphat:


----------



## Ravndal

I like it! lots of soul.

................


----------



## Musician

Oh, of course you can disagree with me, and there is no need to apologize for expressing your sentiments.



ricardo_jvc6 said:


> I don't agree with Musician(Saul). This statement I don't agree (Sorry for being blunt).
> 
> Here is the reason why...
> 
> You are trying to say that his song has no soul incorporated. How can you manage to say that? Just by listening to it? Sure, there might be something involved but how about the writting? Maybe for you it has no soul. It goes the same thing for Baroque. Baroque is very technique-perfection based. The right tempo, the right notes and the right technique. Sometimes it captures the mood of the listener. Because it is all played with same rythym for the whole piece (if it needs to) and they might get bored of listening.
> 
> Furthermore, you can't control artists they have their own unique art. They work their own way. But never, EVER, tell a musician to do something that sounds right to you. It is very arrogant and snob posture for me and I hate those type of people. Pennypacker decided to do go for this type of music and I am happy for him and it is a great the piece. I can feel the emotions he described and I liked it.
> 
> "'hey buddy you better listen to me or else'!..." Threats are souless and meanless things to say to a composer. They are the ones working.
> 
> Althought, I don't want to cause any problem with you Saul, but you have to respect Pennypacker decision. A proper "ARTIST" will listen to his own thoughts, even thou don't like it. (Sorry for being blunt again)


----------



## Pennypacker

@Yardrax, in this work I was aiming for a modern musical language with traditional technique and form. There's a certain number of textures, and the variation is achieved by combining them. Sure I could let my head run wild and come up with all sorts of variations. There's no limit to complexity, but that's not what I was looking for. I think to suggest adding movements is legitimate, just as your suggestion for variation - both will achieve more contrast. There are many sonatas with one-character movements, but when viewed as a whole there is contrast. 

The Opusing is just for fun. I prefer it over the modern exotic naming. Besides, if my composing dreams will be shattered I'd still want a chronological record of my works written as a hobby... During my career as an astronaut or something. 

@ricardo, if you check out Saul's comments on the "will modern music be accepted" you'll see that I have no reason to be offended, Beethoven and Mozart got their share as well. Saul is a more spiritual guy than me, as his approach. For me "soul" is a meaningless term trying to add a spiritual layer to concepts that already exist like ideas and emotions (which obviously were present in my writing process since I'm not a robot). Kind of like god. 

@Ravndal, thank you! I also think it has a soul. But Saul won't agree on that sole aspect.


----------



## MJTTOMB

I don't see anything wrong with this remaining a one-movement sonata. After all, they were pretty characteristic of Scriabin's late period (whose color wheel I see is your avatar), and throughout the 20th century. There's some great use of counterpoint here and an exciting sense of development throughout the piece that kept me interested in spite of Saul's empty assertions about "soul". My only critique regards mm. 217-221, where I feel the left hand quarter notes seem very suddenly out of the character of the piece. Have you experimented with other forms of figuration in these bars? Consistent triplets like the ones in the final few bars (or like the climactic point of Scriabin's D# minor etude, for example) might be good to provide a bit of foreshadowing for your ending. That said, this surpasses the scope and quality of any of my writing for piano, so on this matter I absolutely defer to your choices as the composer.


----------



## Pennypacker

Also Prokofiev's 3rd sonata, which was a major influence. But people here don't argue against the idea of a one-movement sonata, just the lack of contrast, and I somewhat agree. I was writing the subordinate theme (m. 46) as a slower section at first to achieve more contrast, but decided to stick to the general tempo to achieve certain effects (like the sudden forte and piano in mm. 62-65). 
I did experiment with all kinds of figuration in mm. 217-222. I already knew what I wanted for mm. 219 and 222 (LH imitates a motif from the sub theme), so I felt this figuration suited it best, also making a surprising shift. The "foreshadowing" is done in the RH in mm. 219 and 222, perhaps not quite as well as I thought.


----------



## pluhagr

I have no clue what Musician was saying about treating the piece as art from the beginning... I think this is lovely. Your harmonic language is reminiscent of Philip Glass at the beginning of the piece. Your piece is grounded in the classical tradition and is informed by it as well. What you don't do, which is refreshing, is simply compose in a pure 18th century style, which I loath when people do so. It's strikingly contemporary and fresh along with being pleasing to listen to. You develop things well and Your playing is impeccable. My only criticism is that it does seem short and I think something like this could definitely benefit from a couple other movements where these wonderful ideas are expanded upon even more. I just want to hear more.


----------



## PetrB

Pennypacker said:


> I think the problem is it has no Saul. :tiphat:


That is so apposite.

Now, I would not exactly send you to detention for three weeks, but do implore you to contemplate upon your extremely heavy reliance upon octaves. Of course octaves are what the piano can do very well, but here, they seem near auto-pilot generated by your hands and pianist's motor habits vs. having been chosen by your ear.

In their use hear, the do not really add body or resonance as they can if used otherwise.

I think you might think about relying so much on sequencing, though the sort here is typical in some music, my taste has me less interested when you use much of it.

Keep at it, ears more at the steering wheel and the finger-hand habits less.


----------



## Pennypacker

Only one new word for me in this post (apposite). The penultimate sentence ("I think you might think...") was a bit hard for me though, perhaps you could paraphrase? 

I remember reading some of your comments on other threads where you addressed writing from motor habits, thinking "oh ****... I do that! I bet that will be the first thing he'll say if he chooses to comment on my piece". Of course the melody comes from my ears, and the form in my head, but the fingers are too often in charge. I'm wondering if it might be a good thing, since these motor habits are formed playing works for piano, but then again the fingers tend to remember the "fun" parts more. And surely playing a lot of Rachmaninoff doesn't help in this aspect. 

It's actually pretty hard for me to point out specific passages that could benefit from some octave-trimming (except maybe the automatic octaves in the bass, a more comfortable anchor for the LH than a single note), but the general feeling is there. It should be applied when beginning to write. 

Thanks a lot for the advice! One thing you usually address in your reviews, and a word or two would be much appreciated, is if it strikes you as a relevant work in today's music world.


----------



## aleazk

I have more or less the same comments I made in your other piece. I think PetrB is correct about the motor habits things, and I thought also that there may be a relation to my previous comments (the direction thing, for example).
When one sits and composes the entire piece over the piano, we tend to rely in our most impressive motor tricks, as you say. So the piece ends being a succession of these tricks one after another and this may end in the piece being too dense in this thing and also we tend to lose the perspective of, one, the general form of the piece, and two, the connection between the different parts or sections.
In my experience, I found a solution for this by writing less over the piano and more looking at the score. Also, instead of playing the pieces of your favorite composers, try to analyze them by studying the score in an analytical/rational way. Look how they solved the compositional problems that they found as their pieces are developed.
As for the musical language, I perceive a desire from your part to sound "modern". But I'm not sure I agree with the way in which you are trying to do it.
For me it sounds like someone writing in a 19th century style and adding weird harmonic twists in order to "modernize" the work. That's not a bad thing per se, but it's a very limited device and often can simply sound as a 19th century piece with very out of place sections. You are following the steps of the first modernists of the late 19th/ early 20th century. But, now, in the 21st century, there's no need for that. There are plenty of different modern languages already developed. I think that, for writing fresh sounding music, the best thing is to start from those languages, and maybe even innovate over them.
I think you have a great talent for detail and motif development. Keep working and experimenting things. I find in this piece a great desire from your part to stretch things in your style, to find new things. Keep that attitude because is what it will lead you to a completely original style.


----------



## KenOC

I like it! Always a sucker for music with effective motifs. Overall it sounds kind of early-20th century, Prokofiev with a hint of Shostakovich here and there.. Please, keep writing and keep posting! And oh yeah, add a slow movement and a finale if you don't mind! 

(Added on reading some of the other comments) I hope you just keep writing what sounds good to you.


----------



## aleazk

KenOC said:


> (Added on reading some of the other comments) I hope you just keep writing what sounds good to you.


Of course. 
But since Pennypacker asked explicitly about today's music world, I found the comment pertinent.


----------



## Pennypacker

@aleazk, while the writing itself is mostly done over the piano, I do stop a lot to look at the score and plan everything, so the sense of form is never lost. But since it's still hard for me to put exactly what I hear in my head on the score, the texture is mostly dictated by the fingers. 
I'm afraid you caught me on my chip tricks in the harmonic field.  Perhaps not entirely as you described it, but it's definitely the result of a deliberate effort to avoid romantic cliches that my head instinctively tries to pull me into. But since it's a consistent effort and not just a modern "decoration" here and there, I don't think there are out of place sections. You're absolutely right, I'm probably going through a similar process as an early 20th century composer (except the horrible regimes and tragedies), but that's because my musical knowledge is currently at that point. And this is why this forum is such a gold mine, I'm expanding my knowledge here every day. I think it's a good process to start from an earlier era and gradually collecting different influences, rather than immediatly jumping to 21st century music, which is impossible anyway. 

@KenOC, there won't be any other movements, so just get over it!  Seriously though, there's no point in trying to make this piece perfect when I'm in a learning process. I might come back to this piece in the future, but I'll probably prefer to just move on with new ideas. I'm glad you enjoyed it! 
As for writing what sounds good to me, I don't think it's wrong for a beginning composer to have some humility and aspire to write relevant music. There will be enough time for the "I'm an artist and I don't care what people think!" attitude later.


----------



## Balhor

I like it, really good one mate.


----------



## aleazk

Pennypacker said:


> I'm probably going through a similar process as an early 20th century composer (except the horrible regimes and tragedies), but that's because my musical knowledge is currently at that point. And this is why this forum is such a gold mine, I'm expanding my knowledge here every day. I think it's a good process to start from an earlier era and gradually collecting different influences, rather than immediatly jumping to 21st century music, which is impossible anyway.


Yes, you are right. In any case, I was not trying to say that you "must" go and learn modern languages now. But, unfortunately, when one reads my post maybe that's the sensation!. I guess I tend to exaggerate when I'm trying to make a point.
Certainly the best option is step by step, learning and absorbing carefully all the new things. And it's fun also!.


----------



## juergen

Pennypacker said:


> Notes, compliments, scorn or death threats, all much appreciated.


Only compliments. It's great.


----------



## hreichgott

I really like this piece and I think it's quite impressive how much you've developed as a composer even between your previously posted composition (the Rhapsody right?) and this one.

You've not only composed a successful and interesting piece in sonata form, but you've created some very interesting opportunities for emotional development and drama. Prokofiev definitely comes to mind, but Beethoven too, as he must come to mind for any classically conceived and emotionally driven piano sonata.

I think the lack of contrast is a problem in the performance, not the composition. To me the B theme is quite distinct as a musical idea. The problem is that your piano playing is on the percussive and blustery side no matter what sort of musical idea you're presenting, kind of like a parody of a Rachmaninoff forte, and so the different ideas sound more similar in your interpretation than they would necessarily need to. Maybe hand this off to a pianist who plays a lot of Beethoven and not so much Rachmaninoff and see what you get?

This might be related to the octave issue that PetrB pointed out (and I agree with him btw). If I had to guess I'd say that you are on the young side, teenage or young adult, and that you only recently began playing advanced music on the piano, maybe 5 years ago or less. I have noticed that piano students who recently gained access to pieces with lots of octaves and big chords have a period of time when they confuse the ability to produce octaves and big chords with the ability to play the piano well. I wonder if this has translated into your tendency to write lots of octaves into your pieces when they may not necessarily be called for musically. I think that you would do well to mentally separate GOOD sounds from FORCEFUL sounds. Forceful can be good in the right way for the right reason, of course, but forceful doesn't equate to better or more impressive. It is only more impressive during a certain period of being a student when the more advanced students have pieces with a lot of octaves and the more intermediate students don't, because it identifies you as being a somewhat more advanced student at that moment. That's all it's good for.

I am sorry that that became a little bit personal. I know that I am making some guesses about you without knowing you very well. All this is just because I think you are quite talented and I enjoy your music, and I'd love to hear what you come up with when you've disrupted those habits a bit more. I look forward to hearing how you continue to grow as a composer.

P.S. What is the "sp" dynamic marking? It almost looks like you mean it to be the opposite of sforzando except I don't know what that would be.... sporzando?  If you meant subito piano, the usual way of notating that is p with "sub." or "subito" marked nearby.


----------



## Pennypacker

Well I did mention my mediocre piano skills in the OP.  Also, the piano I used for the recording is a lot 'stiffer' than mine, so it was hard for me not to play in that percussion manner. 
You don't need to apologize for your criticism. As I've said to aleazk in private (he was also concerned about my ability to take a punch), praise is pleasant and appreciated, but it's criticism that will help my development. The harsher the better (when it's constructive, not 'soul' arguments). 
You're making educated guesses, nothing wrong with that, and you're spot on. I'm 22, I started playing at 6, took it (kind of) seriously at about 14, and gone 'advanced' at 16 or 17. Exclude 3 years in the army (almost zero practice) and there you have it. :tiphat:

Thank you for your comment, I'm glad someone addressed my performance as well, especially from a professional pianist's perspective. And now that I think of it, 'sp' does seem strange.


----------

