I wrote this short piece, and I was thinking of trying to write some variations for it as well (so I can practice a bit). I focused a bit more on the rhythm and less on the details, regarding which I could improve a few strategic points, which seem a bit obvious to me, but I didn't necessarily want to complicate things, wanting to make it as fluid as possible. The first version was more static (especially at the beginning), and I added some thirty-second note figurations both to reintroduce the original rhythmic pattern and to make everything more lively. The ending is deliberately left hanging, precisely in anticipation of the variations. I didn't obsess too much over the recording because, as it happens, when you record, you always make mistakes and are never satisfied (at least I am).
You've surely already thought about it, but every time I listen to it, I always expect an ascending progression (around about 1'), even if not modulating...
Progressions are exactly where I stopped when I was studying, and I didn't delve into them; "anyway, I use them" even if not often. The point you are talking about, I thought of it to give a different "twist" to the piece, but I didn't think about the progression; in fact, for me, that point is a link with the continuo. I "found" the main idea by trying that rhythm, and I tried to use a minimum of "regularity" in the harmonic successions, then I proceeded with solutions that I sought more out of taste than technique.
Forgive me but I was mistaken, the point I am talking about is at the 50th second; what you mean, yes, you are right, and in fact while I was writing the preceding part I thought about the possibility of using a progression, but I preferred to maintain a similar rhythmic figure without adopting the progression, this because I would have delayed the following part. Here I think lies, also often in what I write, the key to understanding why (besides the already mentioned disasters related to discomfort) one of the main problems I encounter in composition is development; but this time I took more care with the rhythmic aspect, which at least in part (I think, perhaps wrongly, because the doubt rightfully remains and nothing is definitive) gives more continuity to the piece.
At 1:07 the repeated note seems a bit "destabilizing" to me. It has the prominence of a structural element, at least to my ear, but in reality it appears and disappears without leaving a trace. Since you are thinking about Variations, and since that repeated note has a vaguely Beethovenian flavor, it occurs to me that you could eliminate the repeated note at that point and build an entire Variation on the idea of the repeated note (see, for example, the Diabelli Variations).
I have never listened to the variations you are talking about; they could certainly be a starting point from which to learn. The repeated note is present in the second version of this piece; the first does not include it, but that point seemed too static to me given what precedes and follows it, hence the repeated note. Also, I like the repeated note (speaking generally); it offers ideas and interesting possibilities (not in this case, obviously, but in very elaborate works). Thanks for the suggestion anyway; I also need to learn how to work with few elements, and for someone who has trouble both expanding and synthesizing, that is no small feat.
