Fugue Workshop 2013

I also quite like Geppino Sisi's escape

Very beautiful and heartfelt also yours Geppno, ... it makes one want to study it

Beyond the formal discussion, where there is nothing to be said, I also liked Geppino's escape.

If it weren't for the pedalboard, which is prohibitive for a pianist, I would study it immediately.

@Bianca.

Do you happen to have an mp3 of your latest escape?

Thanks

Aspirante wrote:

@Bianca.

Do you happen to have an mp3 of your latest fugue?

Thanks

Not yet, as soon as I finish it I will upload it in the other topic. Bye.

A few questions for Geppino.

Could you help me understand, on a harmonic level, passages like the end of measure 10 and the beginning of 12?

Clearly the harmonic context is not traditional; at measure 14 I feel the major seventh A# is a bit harsh, perhaps because it is taken by direct motion.

I haven't looked at the whole thing yet, but given how much happens afterwards (I mean harmonically and in the movement of the parts), at measure 5 I would have closed the subject with a nice D... or rather. It often happens that even in 2 voices the interval of an empty octave (unison) occurs, or the leap on the octave interval (see measure 15 between right hand and pedal D F# and C# C#). These are certainly conscious choices though, personal taste; it gives me a sense, more than emptiness, of being 'open' in the sense that this way very intense points and very empty points are formed.

Since the piece sounds good overall anyway, I was interested in understanding the reasoning behind the choices.

Beautiful Geppino,

this "rigorous" transformation of yours surprises me in a particular way, considering your old, very libertine style!

Excellent work, very accessible and varied. Well done!

(ignore the overly academic criticisms )

(to the relative major I would have modified it D RE do# si la# si... la... sol... etc... unfortunately the subject transposed to major is not too bright; surely in the original version the composer must have sabotaged the transposition to major)

A few questions for Geppino.

Could you help me understand, on a harmonic level, passages like the end of measure 10 and the beginning of 12?

Last two beats of measure 10: we are in F# minor, I (tonic) moving to the II degree, the real notes are B in the left hand and G# in the right; the right hand performs a descending motion on the Bach scale, while in the left hand the last two notes (the sixteenth notes A and B) are a bass flourish.

Measure 12: there is an immediate modulation playing on a change of mode; F# minor modulates immediately to major to go to B minor, and this is introduced by the natural G in the bass and the A# in the left hand; frankly, this point seems quite clear to me harmonically.

Clearly the harmonic context is not traditional; at measure 14, the major seventh (B-A#) sounds a bit harsh, perhaps because it is taken by direct motion.

It's not that all intervals must necessarily be consonant; here we are on an F#7 chord that lasts for the entire measure. It is clear that in the motion of the parts, dissonant intervals will also be created from time to time, and thank goodness they are, otherwise you know how boring it would be if they were all thirds and sixths.... then there is something to say about the dissonance you mention: it occurs on a weak beat, and in the two subsequent movements there is a motion by thirds between the two hands; I don't see all this harshness.

I haven't looked at the whole thing yet, but seeing how much happens afterward (I mean harmonically and in the motion of the parts), at measure 5 I would have closed the subject with a nice D... or rather.

No, it is better to close on B from many points of view; D leaves a sense of incompleteness, while B clearly makes it understood that the subject ends there, coming from a descending phrase and therefore finding its natural conclusion by continuing to descend; rising to D would be useless.... even if an octave interval is created afterwards—in fact, it is desirable that an octave interval is created there; the octave interval has its purpose. And then this closing of the II degree on the I reminds one very much of Gregorian cadences, so for this reason too, the subsequent octave fits. One concludes by ascending if the last note is a leading tone, but here it is a II degree.

It often happens that even in 2 voices, the empty octave interval (unison) or the leap on the octave interval occurs (see measure 15 between the right hand and pedal: D F# and C# C#). These are certainly conscious choices, however—personal taste; it gives me a sense, rather than emptiness, of being

Thanks Geppino, clear as always. Congratulations again.

PS

...maybe I'll bother you with some other questions further down the road.

Here I am after a long absence, thank goodness for the notifications about new initiatives.

I must say that the escape of Gozzo/Frank and Geppino is truly driving me crazy... but how on earth do you make them sound so good?! (I'm also talking about the libraries).

Bianca's is very unique, and I hope she publishes the mp3 of the second proposal as well... unfortunately, I am not a pianist.

I must say that RStrauss's is also worth listening to... you are truly talented and I hope more works will arrive.

A warm greeting

Margherita

Ludovica wrote:

Thank you Geppino, clear as always. Congratulations again.

PS

...maybe I'll bother you with some other questions further down the line.

You don't bother me at all, that is exactly the spirit of the workshops...

I haven't looked at it closely yet, but upon a first listen

cristiank83 wrote:

this "rigorous" transformation of yours surprises me in a particular way, considering your old, very libertine style!

I find it rigorous nonetheless, as counter-proof that syntax has nothing to do with the character of a piece

Regarding the school fugue, I took a couple of liberties: there are appoggiaturas that resolve to the upper note, which is not incorrect but it would be preferable to have them descend during an exam, and suspensions where the impact lasts longer than the preparation, whereas according to the academic rule, the preparation must last at least as long as the impact, more but not less. Then I doubled the voices in some places (before the stretto and in the finale) to give a sense of greater harmonic fullness, something that is generally allowed only on pedals by doubling the bass. Harmonically, there is nothing that wouldn't be acceptable even at an academic level, and if there is, it is something I missed; just as there will surely be fifths and octaves somewhere, I didn't pay much attention to them. I remember anyway that this fugue is instrumental and not vocal, so a bit more elasticity in the voice leaps or in the extension and the distances between them can be acceptable.

Comment on Bianca's B fugue.

The tempo is vivace, the piano writing could be improved.

For example:

-at measure 9, that B in the left hand you could write in the right hand

-at measure 18, likewise, the two D's in the left hand give them to the right hand

-at measure 19, the B in the left hand you can give it to the right hand

Then

-at 32 and 67 (always vivace), I find them on the limit of playability. See also 47, first dyad

-at 84 a 'polyp' is needed (second chord)

I really like it between measures 37-40

Instead, I like less:

-at 16 the left hand is too low/grave, not very clear compared to the rest

-returning 3 times to F# between 20, 26 and worse at 28

Here I wouldn't know, at 12 surely in the left hand I think you indicated a natural D, after the held D#... personally, I don't mind the D# there

In general, I should play it through at tempo to get a very precise idea, but on paper there are points that I like more and points that I like less

cristiank83 wrote:

(ignore overly academic criticisms )

...what are you referring to? So far I haven't read any.. and from memory, not even in previous editions, also because Geppino is one of those who comments... and it seems strange to me that he would make comments from an academic point of view. Who knows....

Maybe it depends on the works; if someone writes a shamelessly academic piece... how do you think the comments will be made?

cristiank83 wrote:

surely in the original version the composer must have boycotted the transposition to major)

In reality, you can listen to it among the arrangements; the original is by Corelli and besides the workshop participants, there is also an arrangement by Bach

AbateFaria wrote:

Comment on Bianca's second fugue.

Thank you very much for the precious indications. Tonight I will try to make the necessary corrections and, if I can, produce the new mp3.

@ Geppino

I've finished listening to it, and I must say that despite what you call "licences," it sounds good because everything is managed according to a path that doesn't lead to any real clashes... even when there are those points where dissonance is used significantly.

Curiosity...

geppino12575 wrote:

Harmonically, there is nothing that wouldn't work even at an academic level

... how would you get out of points like time signatures 53 or 63?

At measure 53, there is the third of the German sixth chord; perhaps the natural F in the bass should have been an E#, I didn't formalize it too much...

At measure 63 in the first two movements, the third of the chord is missing and the measure begins with F# in all three voices; during examination, this could easily be avoided by modifying measure 62 of the left hand: instead of being D# and E#, the last two notes could be changed to F# and G# to resolve to A so that the third of the chord is present. I did not want to do this to preserve the integrity of the countersubject in the first stretto, and also because the unison of the three voices has its reason for existing at that point and actually lasts very little, because the natural G in the bass immediately after the F# already announces that something harmonically is moving towards other shores...

And you did well Geppino

When something sounds good, you don't change it

To Bianca I would like to say this: power is nothing without control... if you want to handle fire you must be sure not to burn yourself.... impose a rule on yourself and follow it, in my opinion you would only have something to gain. No one can take away the fire of the idea from you, no rule can limit fantasy, on the contrary it can enhance it, but it is you who must dominate the fantasy and not let yourself be tossed right and left like a raft in a storm....