hai dato una spinta netta alle dissonanze praticamente da subito; ho l'impressione che sia un po' brusco, anche se è troppo breve per dare un giudizio definitivo.
you gave a sharp push to the dissonances almost immediately; I have the impression that it is a bit abrupt, even if it is too short to give a definitive judgment.
sarei curioso di vedere come te ne esci nelle battute successive, secondo me sei a rischio "pantano": procedere con dissonanze così marcate ti porta al disordine; riproporre le battute iniziali è una marcia indetro; introdurre nuovo materiale è dispersivo.
I would be curious to see how you fare in the subsequent measures; in my opinion, you are at risk of a "quagmire": proceeding with such marked dissonances leads you to disorder; re-proposing the initial measures is a step backward; introducing new material is dispersive.
tu cosa avevi in mente ?
what did you have in mind?
Come scrivevo nella "presentazione" è un frammento per descrivere l'idea di orchestrazione ... le 2/3 battute che ho aggiunto mi servivano solo per proporre un numero ragionevole di battute che lasciasse assaporare l'idea di orchestrazione più che i contenuti armonici o di sviluppo che verranno (e che non ci sono )...so che mi sono fregato da solo andando al quinto grado, che poi tende a risolvere su sol- appena sentito ...ma anche un mib- sarebbe una bella sorpresa.
As I wrote in the "introduction," it is a fragment to describe the idea of orchestration... the 2/3 measures I added were only needed to propose a reasonable number of measures that would allow one to savor the idea of orchestration rather than the harmonic or developmental content that will come (and which is not there)... I know I screwed myself over by going to the fifth degree, which then tends to resolve on G- as soon as it's heard... but even an Eb- would be a nice surprise.
Il punto però non è questo, è come ho trattato il tema a livello di orchestrazione...prendi pure le prime 4 battute (e basta), se vedi ho avuto un approccio diverso...non ho preso le linee date e le ho assegnate ad uno strumento ma le ho plasmate alle esigenze dell'idea che avevo in mente....(ribadisco) idea di orchestrazione.
The point, however, is not this; it is how I treated the theme at the level of orchestration... just take the first 4 measures (and that's it), if you see I had a different approach... I didn't just take the given lines and assign them to an instrument, but I shaped them according to the needs of the idea I had in mind....(I repeat) idea of orchestration.
Comunque accolgo l’appunto sulle dissonanze/disordine del dopo…ma non era questo il mio intento
Anyway, I accept the note regarding the dissonance/disorder that follows... but that was not my intention
Comment on the orchestration of the theme by Talentuoso
2 violins seem few to me compared to the prevalence of instruments in the low register ... either remove them definitively and add some woodwinds or give them more body
The double bass line is a bit monotonous counting the 6 bars, you have 2... maybe something different can be studied ... given the dialogue of the other instruments
Pity the Violin I returns to the sol and to the same point of the bar
The viola I in the high register stands out well; if you wanted to make that line sing, you succeeded
I don't see any bowing indicated ... nor phrasing
Dynamics are missing
One would definitely need to see what comes next
However, it is understood how you wanted to approach the theme, namely to derive a counterpoint different from the one proposed in reduction and eventually bring home other melodic fragments and chromatics.
The only thing is that here jumps of perfect fourths or fifths seem a bit baroque to me... I might be wrong...
- I chose to give the 2nd theme, in the recapitulation, G-flat, but I imagine G major would have been more logical ......
I mean that, especially in the piece for strings, the change of mode in the 2nd theme led me to vary the melody a lot; it might seem more like a development than a re-presentation of the 2nd theme .... or not ?!
Can I ask you to summarize the formal structure and tonality regarding the orchestral version.... just so I know:
First theme: G-flat
Second theme: B-flat+
Etc....
I saw that it is written in the score, but I think it would be useful for both of us to see them in a few lines and in a row.
So, from the little I know, in the exposition you moved from the tonic key and its relative major... I'd say a classic.
Strange perhaps is the development in G minor, but not so much because of the mode (if you were alluding to G+) but because of the strong presence of this key... you could have done a nice C minor, the fourth degree.
The recapitulation in G minor works, another classic... perhaps proposing the second theme in G minor is also redundant, in the sense that, not so much because of the mode, you could have perhaps moved to the fifth degree... D+ and close beautifully.
Anyway, listening by ear, it doesn't feel heavy, so I would say that this is an important fact and goes beyond any schema
zaccaria, I'm afraid there is a bit of confusion in your comment (perhaps between keys and chords?)
in the exposition, the 2nd theme is not in the relative major (Bb) but in a parallel key (Eb), always a classic but not of classicism
the development must range through different keys, but I don't think the starting point is that important (and anyway in a sensible key...)
however, I don't quite agree regarding the recapitulation: the essence of sonata form lies in the tension between two tonal poles, which arises with the 2nd theme and explodes in the development, but in the recapitulation this tension can no longer exist, and therefore repeating the 2nd theme in the dominant would be the negation of this process.
thanks for the comment strauss, you know I always appreciate observations on piano technique
l'only thing I feel like contesting is that the second theme does not have a sufficiently contrasting character. to me it seems so, and from this perspective the re-presentation of an element from the 1st theme (the supporting note) I see as an added value.
thanks for the comment strauss, you know I always appreciate observations on piano technique
as a pianist, I believe that notes on technique are good especially for those who are not... and naturally it applies to all other instruments.
AleGozzo wrote:
the only thing I feel I can contest is that the second theme does not have an sufficiently contrasting character. To me, it seems that it does, and from this perspective, the reintroduction of an element from the 1st theme (the pedal note) is seen by me as an added value.
... and in fact, I consider the reintroduction of that infamous element from the 1st theme to be too similar. I think it's a matter of taste... in fact, the point was related to the 'type' of second theme and not how it is laid out... but knowing you, it is something you do often, so I consider it to be a characteristic of your music... you probably already know this, but looking at my pieces, for me second themes 'must' be very different... a bit like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde!
I'm a bit overwhelmed right now, but I'll be back very soon.
zaccaria, I'm afraid there is a bit of confusion in your comment
...now you understand why instead of doing played football, I preferred spoken [football]
Anyway, even by speaking one learns something, I understood... but it shows that you know what you are doing, so I don't think you need confirmation ... okay, comparing notes, but you already have the answers ... so ...? ...
I downloaded Ale's tracks and Talentuso's panel and I am reading through the various posts. I am curious to see RStrauss's version and perhaps make cross-comparisons on the topic as well.
And they are giving me a hard time on these topics and it seemed like a way to share some information/knowledge that might be useful... maybe not everyone is interested in producing "complete" and "expressive" scores... I think it's a matter of credibility. Your AleGozzo, aside from a few little things, seemed clear about where they were going... Talentuoso's is a bit untidy (definitely intentional) but I don't think that makes it invalid.
I know AleGozzo and Frank are waiting for me ASAP at the gate, but please be patient for a few more days for my version ... unforeseen events have distracted me a bit. It is already written and inserted in Finale, I just need to tidy it up.
The continuation of the theme seems to start well. I am waiting to see the rest.
Regarding the orchestration, I must say that the two poor violins will wear out their bows just to be heard. There is too much disproportion between the mid-low part of the orchestra and the high part, and often the viola goes above the violins and the cello goes above the viola.
It can work, but there must be support from dynamic markings aimed at not letting the instruments that are lower down disappear.
The cello and viola as you have placed them are in their so-called "tenor" register, which is very exuberant and sonorous, while you place the violins in a low register.
anyway ... I would like to see the complete piece before expressing myself fully.
I know AleGozzo and Frank are waiting for me at the gate, but please be patient for a few more days for my version ... unforeseen events have distracted me a bit. It is already written and inserted in Finale, I just need to tidy it up.
So will there be 3 more arriving in batches? You, Raffaele, and Frank ... (plus the original)
It also seems convenient to me, that way we have a little time to cushion the blow
Some aspects of the piece for Pf and other parts of the orchestration. Anyway, I am still working on it... As soon as possible I will deliver.. I will also do two versions or maybe 3... but I don't know when yet Sorry for the delay
So there will be 3 more arriving in batches? You, Raffaele and Frank ... (plus the original)
It really seems so; I have finally freed myself from a couple of major commitments, due to which I will present the piece in the ponte area in early November. I ask for forgiveness for the delay, but the alternative was presenting nothing at all. So let's settle for this.
I don't know how RSrauss is doing, he might have lost track of my Agnus Dei, but for those who have already asked me for news about the original, regardless, I will pass on the references in the first week of November
