Fugue Workshop 2014

antares86 wrote:

G-sharp leaves me perplexed; I see it as the leading tone of D minor, but that G-natural follows it and is then proposed again in the next measure as a progression.... I don't see it in D minor..... unless there are passing notes

Just take any chromatic fugue by Pachelbel...you will see that it is the most normal thing on earth...they were already doing it in the '600...

http://imslp.org/wik...chelbel,_Johann)

Page 12

.. it had even been analyzed on the forum (from memory, Frank/Faria/Gozzo)

DiesIrae wrote:

...which would be a tonicization of the IV degree.

In my opinion, a strong tonicization like this would only make sense if the subject started in A+, which would require retouching a note in the first measure.

If we really want to talk about what is "plausible," one only needs to look at the repertoire: V+ V- + is the most plausible thing regarding the harmonization of descending chromaticism. It is one of the two solutions that work. Obviously, it also depends on the stylistic context. However, if you think of a tonal context, what sense is there in starting in A- and immediately burning yourself with a 2-measure tonicization of the fourth degree? Not even Scriabin did that... I would play it as a re-harmonization during the recapitulation. One also needs to see how you intend the subsequent part.

Besides, if there were a single solution, every subject would correspond to only one fugue...

In fact, I used the conditional precisely because I still have to decide what to do... and considering that fugue is not my strength, it will be a difficult decision.

rstrauss wrote:

In fact, I used the conditional precisely because I still have to decide what to do ... and considering that running away is not my strong suit, it will be a difficult decision.

I would dare... we aren't in school

It inspires me a lot, I think I will participate

To me, it clearly seems to be a response in Re.

By replacing the Mi, the interesting 6th interval jump would be lost and the theme would be too distorted.

Furthermore, I take this opportunity to ask everyone (since I am studying fugue at the conservatory) with what criteria you determine the modulation of the subject and what limits you set for yourself in order to preserve the basic subject theme.

cristiank83 wrote:

Furthermore, I take this opportunity to ask everyone (since I am dealing with the fugue at the conservatory) with what criteria you determine the modulation of the subject and what limits you set for yourselves in order to preserve the basic subject theme.

Hi Cristian, I took the liberty of opening an ad hoc topic

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/2900-criteri-per-determinare-la-modulazione-del-soggetto/

It seems like an interesting area that deserves a topic

I wonder why it reminds me of something by Bach

unfortunately I have to pass this time, I never studied fugues properly and during this period time is a tyrant for me...

good luck to all the participants

Classic, for sure the deadline won't be before April 2014

AbateFaria wrote:

Classic, for sure the deadline won't be before April 2014

se davvero c'è così tanto tempo dopo gennaio sono più libero e ci sarò

Beautiful theme! However, it's not Bach, let's say 2 generations later

Maybe it's not one of his most famous works, but...

Yes Bianca, a subject that is captivating to say the least

AbateFaria wrote:

Yes Bianca, a subject that is captivating to say the least

Even if the deadline is quite far off and it is too early to say, I think I will participate,...

... I was forgetting about this

cristiank83 wrote:

To me, it clearly seems to be a real answer.

By replacing the E, one would lose the interesting 6th interval jump and the theme would be too distorted.

Furthermore, I take this opportunity to ask everyone (since I am studying fugue at the conservatory) with what criteria you determine the modulation of the subject and what limits you set for yourself in order to preserve the basic subject theme.

It also seems like a real answer to me (in the sense that it can be done, if one likes it). Replacing the sixth jump is out of the question, for the reason you also well stated: it is an element too characteristic of the subject. But then, frankly, I don't even understand why one should do without it.

As for your question, I wouldn't know how to answer you because I am only a self-taught amateur. However, in the exposition, it is known that the modulation of the subject goes to the dominant, whereas I suppose that the preservation of the subject should be preferable (even if Bach didn't care... See Fugue XII in 4 voices from the first CBT, just to name one).

Bianca wrote:

Great theme! However, it's not Bach, let's say 2 generations later

Perhaps it is not one of his most famous works, but...

Darker than Bach. And it's a truly ugly subject, in my opinion, contained within a very (too) wide interval and with the coda returning to the home key. Furthermore, it is extremely constrained from a harmonic standpoint. It is clearly a keyboard subject, but I would be surprised if the original were for more than two voices; but maybe I'm mistaken... Anyway, we'll get there.

P.S. Obviously, this means that this time I will be there too.

CromaDiBrera wrote:

However, in the exposition, it is known that the modulation of the subject goes to the dominant, whereas I suppose that the preservation of the subject should be preferable.

If by "preservation of the subject" you mean real answer, I would say no, the real answer is not preferable to mutation. Simply put, there are some Subjects that require a real answer, others a mutation.

If the head of the Subject does not touch the dominant (the fifth sound of the home key, to be clear), the answer is real.

If the head of the Subject touches the dominant, or even better starts from the dominant, a mutation is necessary.

This is the rule, then obviously there are all the variables of the case, and every Subject must be analyzed in its specificity.

I advise taking Well-Tempered Clavier I and II, and studying all the expositions: Fugue No. 1 real (the head of the Subject does not touch the dominant); Fugue No. 2 mutation (the third note of the Subj is a G, which in the mutated answer becomes C); Fugue No. 3 mutation (the Subj starts from the dominant)...

In case of doubt, ask the forum!

CromaDiBrera wrote:

Darker than Bach. It's a truly ugly subject, in my opinion, contained within a very (too) wide interval and with the tail returning to the home key. Furthermore, it is extremely constrained from a harmonic standpoint. It is clearly a keyboard subject, but I would be surprised if the original were for more than two voices; but maybe I'm mistaken... Anyway, we'll manage.

P.S. Obviously, this means that this time I will be there too.

And you'll see when you hear the rest
a part aside, I must say that the original piece, which is a movement from a sonata for violin and piano, might leave you somewhat disappointed (especially knowing who wrote it) while I find that the theme is quite prolific (obviously with any necessary adjustments) and easy to develop. We shall see

I don't think I can manage to complete the fugue, there are too many difficulties for me.

i am removing myself from the list-

greetings

Maybe I will be there