Two-Voice Invention

Very successful, thank you!

CromaDiBrera wrote:

The sheet music. I hope the upload worked...

Downloaded

Can you clarify the harmony of measure 32 for me?

A measure 13 (and consequently 14 for the B), I don't know why, seems a bit unhappy to me having blossomed with the C ... since there is already a B underneath it.

Meditative work, this is the feeling it leaves me with, (regardless of the images), it seems successful to me from a motivic point of view, I don't know if I am saying something accurate, but you seem a bit more confident of yourself in this composition, in the sense that over time you are maturing at a compositional level and

this shines through in this work, giving it a certain stability.

AbateFaria wrote:

Can you clarify the harmony of measure 32 for me?

Seventh in fifth species on the strong beat and V on the weak beats; the passing note of the seventh in the bass is not correct, but I chose it anyway because, in my opinion, it "sang" better than other solutions. However, now that you point it out, perhaps I could have done better...

AbateFaria wrote:

In measure 13 (and consequently 14 for the B), I don't know why, but it seems a bit unhappy to me to have flourished with the C ... since there is already a B underneath.

The movement of the second voice lies in the response (it is the pattern of measure 4), but there is no C: it is an Ab (you might have been confused by the treble clef in the bass...?); on the strong beat of 13, in practice, you have a first inversion (with the fifth omitted). The upper voice, instead, repeats the tail of measure 7 (which I liked because of the way, proceeding through appoggiaturas, it leads to the third in the dominant modulation in a way that seemed "cantabile" to me (I reiterate the term because it is the aspect I appreciate most and which I would like to reproduce when listening to the genre: the cantability of every single voice, even while respecting harmonic constraints).

Naturally, in reproducing a melodic pattern, I tried to respect its intervals; it seemed to me a matter of "merit," being able to "make the math work" without changing them.

Piccinesco wrote:

Meditative work...

Thanks, Piccinesco! Good to see you...!

CromaDiBrera wrote:

I used East West's Quantum Leap Pianos; this would be the Bösendorfer (without track equalization).

It actually sounded familiar to me... This is the gold version, right?

Regarding measure no. 32, I had understood correctly then, ok.

Piccinesco wrote:

Regarding measure no. 32, I understood correctly then, ok.

You can also understand it as the II of the minor scale, but the harmonic function is the same.

TheSimon wrote:

It actually seemed familiar to me... This is the gold version, right?

If the Gold is the simplified one, I don't think so (when I purchased it, there was no "Gold"; it was the top tier on the Play platform). To be clear, the same pack also includes Steinway, Bechstein, and Yamaha. In this track, I used two microphone recordings: the player's perspective and the "close" one, i.e., on the strings (in the mix, halfway between). I selected a rev. of Play in which the low frequencies are highlighted from the rear.

Which Reverb?

CromaDiBrera wrote:

You can also understand it as the II of the minor scale, but the harmonic function is the same.

Ok.

CromaDiBrera wrote:

Seventh of the fifth species on the strong beat and V on the weak beats; the seventh's turning note in the bass is not correct, but I chose it anyway because, in my opinion, it "sang" better than other solutions. However, now that you point it out, perhaps I could have done better...

Movement of the second voice is in the answer (it is the pattern of measure 4), but there is no C: it is an Ab (you might have been confused by the treble clef in the bass...?); on the strong beat of 13, in practice, you have a first inversion (with the fifth omitted). The upper voice, instead, repeats the tail of measure 7 (which I liked because of the way, proceeding through appoggiaturas, it leads to the third in the dominant modulation in a way that seemed "cantabile" to me (I reiterate the term because it is the aspect I appreciate most and which I would like to reproduce when listening to the genre: the cantability of every single voice, even while respecting harmonic constraints).

Naturally, in reproducing a melodic pattern, I tried to respect its intervals; it seemed to me a matter of "merit," being able to "make the math work" without changing them.

Thank you for the clarifications, I re-listened to your fugue 8 (the 2011 workshop), it inherits much in terms of character. Well done.

AbateFaria wrote:

Thank you for the clarifications, I re-listened to your fugue 8 (the 2011 lab), it inherits a lot in terms of character. Well done.

Well, let's hope to always do better... Thank you for the compliment.

Regarding the PlayBack discussion, it actually seems very real