Fugue Workshop 2014

classic wrote:

i don't think I will be able to complete the escape, there are too many difficulties for me.

i am removing myself from the list-

greetings

pity

classic wrote:

there are too many difficulties for me.

In fact, it is a beautiful but tricky Subject

classic wrote:

i don't think I will be able to complete the fugue, there are too many difficulties for me.

i am removing myself from the list-

greetings

It is a pity because those who think they have the most difficulty can actually gain the most profit from these workshops. I threw myself into a fugue years ago, thinking they would laugh at me, but instead I learned a great deal. Here everyone is very generous with actual teaching (because the forum is also frequented by "real" composers), even and especially towards those who propose sketches. In short, it would be worth participating even just to say "I tried, but I got stuck here", because I am certain you would receive instructive advice like I did. After all, it is not a composition competition, but just an opportunity given to those who study and those who seek to improve themselves.

for me it is definitely too early for a fugue.... even for a simple 2-voice fugue...

AbateFaria wrote:

In fact, it is a beautiful but tricky Subject

And it's tricky because it isn't designed for a fugue. The subject is so "self-sufficient" that it greatly limits the possibilities for response, in my opinion (and, as a composer, I would prefer to have more space to invent it, instead). I think that if someone manages to do something good with it, they could even fugue Yesterday or Sapore di Sale...

antares86 wrote:

for me, it is definitely too early for a fugue.... even for a simple 2-voice fugue...

Come on, sooner or later you have to try...! Go for it! It's not a competition, we are one big family...

yeah I understand chroma but I barely read how the response to the subject is constructed, I doubt I'll even finish reading the rest to attempt a "sketch" of a fugue

CromaDiBrera wrote:

It's tricky because it wasn't designed for a fugue. The subject is so "self-sufficient" that it greatly limits the possibilities for response

It would be useful to compare the subject of the first lab with this one (in that case Croma wrote 2 fugues) ... the classic differences and analogies

For those who don't remember, the subject was this

Both subjects are based on a descending chromatic scale, except that in this ideal LAB edition the subject has already blossomed, whereas in the first edition it was without flowering.

On the harmonic level, I presume something can be recycled; on the melodic level, practically in the first LAB there was a need to invent a moving CS... here instead the CS will be static.

They seem like two complementary laboratories to me.

This time I am participating too.

I am already halfway through the fugue, mine will probably arrive even before May.

Out of curiosity, what did you do for the relative major?

Personally, I wanted to maintain the descending chromatic intervals, so I prioritized counterpoint by finding a harmonic solution that works musically even if it is not entirely academic.

Ciao

Cristian

cristiank83 wrote:

Out of curiosity, what did you do for the relative major?

Relative major of what?

cristiank83 wrote:

Out of curiosity, what did you do for the relative major?

Personally, I wanted to maintain the descending chromatic intervals, so I prioritized counterpoint by finding a harmonic solution that works musically even if it is not entirely academic.

Let's just say that the Dubois-style fugue does not take historical requirements into account ...

Tanto for a bit of fun, could someone point me to a Baroque fugue with a chromatic subject... that modulates to the relative major?

Here is where the "theoretical" model reaches its limits, especially since the subject of this Laboratory is not even Baroque... but Classical (including the harmonic "inflections")

I continue not to understand... neither the chromatic subject, nor the modulation to the relative major. Did I get the lab wrong...?

Ok Croma.

The structure of the academic fugue (the one Cristian is referring to) involves a macro structure (I'm calling it macro... eh...) which is essentially as follows:

- Exposition: S, R, S, and R (where the Subject is in the tonic key and the Answer is in the dominant key)

- Episode

- Exposition to the relative (major or minor, depending on where you start) S and R: if, for example, the subject were in A minor (answer in E minor), this section would go into C major/G major (precisely relatives major... same key signature alterations but a change of mode). You can also use the episode to modulate

- Episode

- Exposition to other degrees (only Subject is enough): IV major or minor, it always depends on where you start... and others based on how much you want to extend this section

- Episode that becomes a dominant pedal (obviously, of the tonic key)

- Stretti: which start from the tonic key.

Aside from extreme synthesis, by "relative" one means precisely that part of the fugue where S and R are proposed in the "complementary" mode to the tonic without changing the key signature.

The gist is that the exposition of the fugue should touch the closest keys in the circle of fifths; so starting from A minor: E minor, C major, G major, D minor, and F major.

Given this, how does one fit a chromatic subject (why chromatic? Remove the flourishes and look at the core notes, you will notice why it is chromatic) into the exposition in the major mode, particularly regarding the use of the diminished seventh chord VII7 typical of the major mode... while the subject has leaps that simply won't sound in a truly Baroque major mode?

To close my point: what did they do in the Baroque period in the presence of a chromatic and flourished subject in this way? Nothing; they skipped the exposition to the relative and used other devices.

I'm not even getting involved (we're not there yet, even theoretically I can understand what is meant, but in practice it's a completely different story), I'm starting to think that besides study problems, there are neurological problems too.

Frank wrote:

Ok Croma.

La struttura della fuga accademica (quella al quale fa cenno Cristian) prevede una macro struttura (la riporto proprio macro...eh...) che sostanzialmente è la seguente:

...

Grazie, Frank. Avevo sentito parlare della fuga di scuola, ma non ne sapevo nulla.

Mi pare evidente che per una struttura di tale portata occorrano (almeno) quattro voci e che la struttura formale, con la modulazione alla tonalità relativa nella parte centrale, diviene chiaramente A-B-A... E da tirare pure per le lunghe, con le modulazioni sul circolo delle quinte...! E' un lavorone... A me pareva già molto poter fare una fuga a tre voci da una 40ina di battute suonabili su tastiera (stile Cbt) ma è chiaro che dovrei essere più preparato. Scusate se mi sono buttato (e ho fatto pure proselitismo), ma non so se je la fo.

Look Croma, you asked me for explanations and I tried to give them to you. But the LAB absolutely does not require a fugue in the style of Dubois; to tell you the truth, I don't even fully agree with it... it is meant specifically for practice, but afterwards one can do whatever they want.

Honestly, I still remember your fugue from the first LAB. I wouldn't fixate on pursuing a specific form... rather, I would focus my efforts on achieving something musical, just as you have already demonstrated you can do. Including the last LAB which you didn't feel like publishing... in my opinion, you should have

CromaDiBrera, I participated in 2012, here you can find my 2-voice fughetta

http://www.pianoconcerto.it/forum/index.php?/topic/714-laboratorio-fuga-2012-elaborati/

eppoi dopo questa tua premessa ....

CromaDiBrera wrote:

Come, come, sooner or later you have to try...! Go for it! It's not a competition, we are one big family...

CromaDiBrera wrote:

Thank you, Frank. I had heard of the school fugue, but I didn't know anything about it.

It seems evident to me that for a structure of such magnitude, (at least) four voices are required and that the formal structure, with the modulation to the relative key in the central part, clearly becomes A-B-A... And even going further, with modulations on the circle of fifths...! It's a huge job... To me, it already seemed like a lot to be able to do a three-voice fugue of about 40 playable measures on the keyboard (Cbt style), but it is clear that I should be better prepared. Sorry if I jumped in (and even went proselytizing), but I don't know if I can manage it.

no way! Think about it, last year, when I had recently joined the forum, I saw the workshop and participated with an improvisation...

In my opinion, it is important to have a musical idea; if you don't develop it with all the proper formalities, patience, you will be able to do it in time if you deem it appropriate. The beauty of these workshops is that you don't have to prepare for an exam, and maybe that way you even manage to learn more

CromaDiBrera wrote:

Thanks, Frank. I had heard of the school fugue, but I didn't know anything about it.

It seems obvious to me that for a structure of such magnitude, (at least) four voices are required.

No, it is possible and one even studies it in 2 voices; the entries are managed with the pitches... and there we go again with the fact that it is a theoretical fugue (if we think about vocalism) and in effect it would then only be performable by organ/piano or a couple of instruments chosen ad hoc... I don't know: bassoon and clarinet

Obviously, 2 and 3-voice fugues are the most difficult and indeed one doesn't understand why, pedagogically speaking, one starts with those in 2 voices... oh well