Bass Harmonization Workshop - 2012

it seems good to me ... besides the classic harmonization, I was intrigued by the idea of breaking up the theme and dividing it into one piece for each instrument in the quartet ... we'll see.

You have already "stolen" my idea

Frank wrote:

You have already "stolen" the idea from me

it seemed to me ... and let's not complicate our lives, we are not happy. :D

Thanks... at least I can see some other proposals.

... are there stylistic constraints?

I imagine Gassy expects something academic, but she isn't the only reader of the forum, even if she was the one who suggested the bass.

Tutto per dire che sin da quando abbiamo iniziato i laboratori, è stato ritenuto importante permettere ai partecipanti di esprimersi al meglio delle loro possibilità...per cui, fai pure quello che ti pare...basta si capisca che sei partito da quello spunto...in modo comunque da legare i diversi elaborati.

I did, I used a string quintet

I gave too, don't massacre me ....

Here to post the works

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/1653-laboratorio-armonizzazione-basso-2012-elaborati/

Thanks Oracle, I just downloaded it ... I like how it sounds, then I will ask you a few questions

Oracolo's Bass:

I'm sorry, but I can't be any meaner; overall it is well done and also holds up upon listening (except for one flaw that is quite noticeable).

The things that I believe are wrong are marked in the attachment, errors that you could have easily avoided given the level of the rest.

Another thing is that, although it is sufficiently flowery, every now and then it "stops" on notes with a quarter mark on all voices, and it doesn't always sound good.

bye

I am downloading everything, thanks guys. Even the comments will be useful to me...

Basso di Aspirante:

truly, there are quite a few errors here, and I find serious deficiencies in the conduct of the parts.

i would suggest you redo it with these rules:

1 - correct notation, meaning 2 voices per staff, the upper one with stems always up, the lower one with stems always down. Otherwise, it is not clear how the parts move.

If you cannot do it this way, then it is better to have one staff for each voice.

2 - all 4 voices must always be used; in your work, sometimes the 4 voices become 3.

3 - parallel movements (see your ending) cannot last for more than 3 consecutive notes (4, but strictly at the limit...), otherwise the sense of independence of the voices, which is fundamental in these exercises, is lost.

4 - watch out for augmented 2nd intervals, which are normally forbidden. You often move from C# to Bb ....

Furthermore, if you also follow this rule, it is better:

forget about any flourishes, passing notes, etc.; concentrate on the harmony and the movement of the parts. It seems to me that you have not yet assimilated the basic rules and therefore that will be a subsequent step; right now you only risk increasing the errors.

greetings, and I hope I have given you a useful opinion and not just a "slaughtering" one

AleGozzo wrote:

2 - all 4 voices must always be used, in your work sometimes the 4 voices become 3.

Question, apart from the "notation" do pauses exist... right? So it's not a problem if it occasionally went to 3 voices, no? That is how I understood Aspirante's piece....

As soon as I finish with the sonata, I will also hand in mine.

AleGozzo wrote:

Oracolo's Bass:

I'm sorry, but I can't be any meaner than this; overall it is well done and it also holds up upon listening (except for one flaw that is quite audible).

The things that I believe are wrong are marked in the attachment, errors that you could have easily avoided given the level of the rest.

Another thing is that, although sufficiently flowery, every now and then it "stops" on notes with a sharp in all voices, and it doesn't always sound good.

bye

…and yes Ale, he tricked me regarding the motion of the parts, in the sense that at measure 4 I should have passed from E and therefore to the violin I I should have played fa fa-mi re, preparing the fa which is an augmented sixth or fifth of the chord

Regarding the sevenths played by the viola at measure 3…um um, I took a "small" liberty …it actually sounded good

At measure 2 I must have gone crazy, I don't remember what reasoning I used anymore, surely I wanted to tonicize the fourth but something didn't work. Too bad...

Thank you for the scrupulous analysis...

Comment on Ale's version

I note the following anomalies:

Meas. 3

i would have avoided the C# of the 2nd movement by leaving it natural. The first one is fine as a flourish.

Meas. 4

parallel fifths in the RH re-la --> mi-si b. are annoying.

1st movement

the G of the RH and the C of the RH go on two overlapping empty fifths mi-si b. and even if there is a B b., it doesn't work. It might have been good to prolong the G until the 2nd beat so you would have had at least the 3rd of the chord.

There would also be the fifth G Sop.-C Ten. which goes to an octave B b. Sop.-B b. ten.

Meas. 7-8

7th of dominant taken by leap in the contraltos B b.-G

by putting 1st mov. C. an A of 2/8 and a G of 1/8 you could also have created the sixths between S. and C. by resuming meas. 2 and you would have had the 7th taken correctly.

For the rest, it is fine.

Upon listening, it sounds pleasant anyway.

Comment on AleGozzo's piece

Excellent, all parts sing well (even the inner ones), you have made the entire set of rules you managed to respect musical, furthermore you have a fantastic sound quality.

Bravo!...and thanks for the example/comparison

rstrauss wrote:

parallel fifths with the right hand re-la --> mi-si bem. is annoying.

... when the second fifth is diminished, everything should be OK