Composition Workshop 2014: piece for piano

@frank meaning?

To me it seems very below tempo; in my opinion, the cantabile movement here is intended almost as if it were written in two halves (given the harmonic rhythm)...thinking of it in relation to the quarter note, I don't know if that is the best approach at an interpretive level. Although I only quickly listened to one part of your arrangement...this thing immediately caught my ear.

Do you really feel it is that slow?

it was my decision, yes, so a bit or so faster but not by much... in fact Sibelius had set it at 60 if I recall correctly... but I slowed it down a little... perhaps this way it is a bit too slow, but I don't tolerate it much faster (obviously an interpreter is free to perform it at whatever speed they want, that is just my "interpretative choice")

60 at the quarter note?

It seems so by default for the walker

Andante: 60-80

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metronomo#Metronomo/?s=2&_suid=1414270864010018474316144394948

@Antares

At 11 I feel like there's a bit of a lack of movement; between 12 and 16, rhythmically it seems too schematic to me. The best idea was definitely to re-propose the theme as a response.

I must say that the theme is very beautiful, difficult to keep up with, and in my opinion, you didn't defend yourself badly. In my opinion, the original parts are much more singable than yours and this can be heard. But taken individually, your parts are not bad.

Since it is your first experiment, it seems like a good start to me.

The problem with the 11th was that I was undecided whether to remove the entire small arpeggiated closing section on the tonic, but I preferred to leave it at the end... The idea for the second central part was to use a "restricted version in contrary motion of the theme"; it's not very successful and is a bit schematic, but I didn't feel like daring too much right away

And thanks, Father

I am just finishing a telephone conversation with Frank during which, among other things, we spoke about this workshop. Beyond the time indications, I also believe that the andante cantabile here is intended based on the minims; it is the musical context that suggests this, along with the thought of a barcarolle on the waves. The presentation of the acephalous theme also gives a sensation of momentum (confirmed by the upward leaps), which cannot be too slow. Furthermore, the fact that it is an andante cantabile indicates that the voice should suggest its musical diction; try singing the theme and you will find the right tempo. This is my idea...

For me, the meaning is this:

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/condivisione/tema.mp3

Singing over it brings out the sense of musical breaths, being an andante cantato...

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/condivisione/temavocal.mp3

maybe while setting up the recording I let myself be influenced a little too much by some recordings of the original... but the piece was already written... in any case I still need to figure out how to properly set up the playbacks, Sibelius 7.5 has changed various things regarding playbacks

@Antares, you wrote: "maybe this way it's a bit too slow but I don't tolerate it much faster"

In fact, your piece is permeated by the original theme which, in my opinion, as TheSimon also explained, does not hold up at such a slow tempo.

I also read: "I let myself be influenced a little too much by some recordings of the original"; when we publish it, we will talk about it more clearly, but 50 at the quarter note I don't think is very accurate... and the first 4 bars are enough to say so.

Forgetting the tempo you chose, I think Faria made some good observations that I share. Perhaps you should have developed the small central section a bit more, let's say a timid attempt that does you honor... but since you were at it, why not expand on the subject a little more?

If you don't do it this time, next time, building on this experience, you will find the courage to go further.

That was a matter of personal taste Frank, and the way I play is also influenced by what I listen to... At least for me...

For the middle section, I was undecided whether to make it 4 or 8 bars; I wasn't very sure how to develop it further, so this time I preferred to limit myself to 4 bars, which act more as a separation between the theme and the reprise rather than a development... Next time I will dare more

Antares Version

I tried playing it and indeed I struggled to reach the end. Too slow ... at certain moments the sense of the theme is lost, especially where there is little movement.

I would have performed it at least at 70 for the quarter note.

The only thing I really can't stomach is that it bored me in measure 10: it could have ended with the low G in the left hand ... the three eighth notes in the right hand and the chord of measure 11 are completely useless, if not harmful to the overall economy of the piece.

It's worth listening to and anyway well done for having tried ... the theme was not easy.

Aside from the tempo, an album track with a melancholy character. I would say: improvable.

N.B. Finished. I am in the post-production phase, will deliver shortly.

@Bianca

I like it as a track, there are just a couple of short points that I think are a bit out of context in the sense that they are too distant in terms of sound compared to the immediate before and after, and they don't seem like reprises to me (see e.g., 1'28'').

Moreover, the operation of exploiting a pre-existing rhythmic structure is always an interesting thing; perhaps in the first part its shadow is felt even too much... but probably, more or less debatable, it will be a choice.

Unfortunately, during this period I don't have the possibility to do precise checks on the instrument, so you will have to settle for a "light" comment.

Where are the scores? I can't find them: just curious.

@Stefanus, in the workshops section:

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/4012-laboratorio-di-composizione-2014-brano-per-pianoforte-elaborati/

The deadline is October 31st, actually Bianca and Antares are early birds

This is the general index of the workshops

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/1141-indice-dei-laboratori/

Frank wrote:

@Bianca

I like it as a track, there are just a couple of short points that I think are a bit out of context in the sense that they are too distant in terms of sound compared to the immediate before and after, and they don't seem like pickups to me (see e.g., 1'28'').

Furthermore, the operation of exploiting a pre-existing rhythmic structure is always an interesting thing; perhaps in the first part its shadow is felt even too much... but probably, more or less debatable, it will be a choice.

Unfortunately, during this period I don't have the possibility to do precise checks on the instrument, so you will have to settle for a "light" comment.

yes, I was also in doubt for a while, but they had their "reason" and in the end I accepted it....

Bianca wrote:

si, anche io sono stata in dubbio per un po', ma avevano una loro "ragione" e alla fine l'ho accettata....

Paraphrasing, the recipe had the better of the cookie.

Frank wrote:

To paraphrase, the recipe had the better of the cookie.

eheheh. In fact, those 3 bars are there because they led me to the suspensive cadence v7 - I - i7 - v7, which in turn opens well to the iv (E minor at measure 88 - a possible tonic of an eventual Dorian mode). I don't know if this is enough to justify the previous 8 bars, which in my opinion seem the most out of context (harmonically they are very static compared to the rest), but I made the choice also to give more emphasis specifically to the restart on E minor.

From 163 (I believe that is the other point you are referring to), the same applies, except here it is more of a preparation for the proposition that ends at 197, which in my opinion is the most lyrical moment (if you want, the climax) of the entire piece.

Anyway, thank you for the comment and the appreciation.