a small happy tune

[PeterG]

Hi folks,

At first I wanted to not show you this one as I was too impressed with other works posted here.... I thought like... "it's not worth showing this, I need to make a big one like a sonata or something" but...... I'll never develop / learn to compose unless I learn from you guys, so here it is anyway.

It's called C-swing as it's supposed to swing in the key of C (major and minor). As usual Finale GPO really does not do it justice but the tune I play a lot to make me happy and energetic.

I have the feeling it can have more to it, but I'm not sure what exactly; suggestions?

the sheet music is attached and here's the soundclick link:

http://www.soundclick.com/util/getpl...d=5622620&q=hi

enjoy !

Peter

[stevel]

At first I wanted to not show you this one as I was too impressed with other works posted here.... I thought like... "it's not worth showing this, I need to make a big one like a sonata or something"

Poppycock Peter. In fact, I'd rather see this than yet another "Sonata" "Symphony" or, for God's sake, a "String Quartet". It's almost as bad as everything having some Lord of the Rings/Fantasy/RPG title. Ok, say it with me - the Romantic Period is over. And even those cats who wrote big symphonies and such wrote little pieces - ever heard of Fur Elise, or "the rage over a lost penny"?

It's called C-swing as it's supposed to swing in the key of C (major and minor). As usual Finale GPO really does not do it justice but the tune I play a lot to make me happy and energetic.

Well, it's square - it doesn't swing - but is it supposed to? I did find it happy though - even though there's a minor part. I think the only thing about GPO is it can give you kind of a false impression - especially on those low notes and the LH chords you have in places - have a real live pianist play this and make sure that things you hear clearly in GPO aren't muddy in real life and vice-versa.

I have the feeling it can have more to it, but I'm not sure what exactly; suggestions?

I don't think it needs more - in fact, I think it needs less! I'd eat that repeat bar. What you might consider is, if you feel you need to repeat - repeating back to the mode change at m.21 (thanks for including the PDF by the way - it's so much easier to discuss when you can see the bars). Otherwise, you might consider repeating back to m.9 instead of all the way to the beginning.

By the way, you usually have a double bar where the key sig changes.

The ending is a little abrupt I think - it seems like you didn't know how to stop, and just stopped. And then you thought, naw, that's too abrupt, I'll add a couple of notes.

You've got an interesting mix of what seems like motives and concepts from Bach's 2 part inventions but in a "classical" style. But what works is that there's a nice distribution of material between the hands that maintains interest.

I think this is a great example of how you can write something - for lack of a better term let's call it "basic" - and short, and in one key area, and have the music maintain interest - in fact, I think that's one of the major flaws of most composers - they're constantly seeking to make things more interesting by making it busier - more chords, larger chords, more parts, etc.

The one major critique I might have of this is only that once it gets going - both parts stay going. Depending on how long the piece ends up being overall, a change of texture would be nice. Like, as it is now, with the repeat - I'd want to have some kind of lightening of texture - less 16th movement, or one part holds while the other part moves type of thing - just for some variety on the repeat. If you choose not to repeat, or choose one of the shorter ones I suggested, it would be ok with the current texture, though it could still definitely benefit from some "taking a breather" here and there.

A couple of notation points:
m.1 - the two quarter rests can be (should be) a half rest - same in m. 3.

m.8 beat 3 LH - an 8th note with staccato is OK - no need for it to be a 16th - sometimes all those flags and 16th rest can be annoying (obviously, you didn't do it on the down beat of the next measure - do you REALLY want a 16th in one and an 8th in the other - if so, you got it, if not, think about it).

m. 15 while it's not necessary because it will be assumed, you might want to put the mf after the crescendo. In fact, you might want to put in a dynamic between the two wedges to show how quiet they're supposed to get (or "poco" "molto", etc.).

m. 21 - double bar.

m.21 - you might consider breaking the beam on those afterbeat notes in the RH - make them flags instead of beamed over a rest. The whole "beam over rests" or "include rests in beamed groups" is something Finale allows - and I believe defaults to - but it's not a traditional practice - it's more the domain of the hyper-complex rhythms of 20th century music.

Likewise, in m. 22 - the RH 16ths - here flags and rests would be more traditional - in fact, they only need to be 16th if you absolutely want them to be - they could be 8th notes with the articulation mark on the afterbeat (in the "wrong" place as syncopations) starting with a 16th rest.

So you might want to look at all those places and decide whether you want (or need) to beam over the rests, and even - if you're using staccato too, whether the rest is even needed.

Finally - the ending - officially, if your RH has a fermata on beat 4 as it does, your LH note should be a dotted half tied to a quarter with a fermata on that quarter. However, the modern shortcut is to put the fermata on the LH note as is. But really you should have it in both parts.

Good Job Peter!

Steve

[PeterG]

Hi Steve,

Thanks so much for taking the time to comment like you did. This is really helpful !

Originally Posted by stevel

Poppycock Peter. In fact, I'd rather see this than yet another "Sonata" "Symphony" or, for God's sake, a "String Quartet". It's almost as bad as everything having some Lord of the Rings/Fantasy/RPG title. Ok, say it with me - the Romantic Period is over. And even those cats who wrote big symphonies and such wrote little pieces - ever heard of Fur Elise, or "the rage over a lost penny"?

Thanks Steve. I'm sticking to writing small pieces for piano as my attention span isn't that great either and I do want to be able to bring it to live myself one day, so making a symphony is out of the question; where the hell do I find an orchestra foolish enough to play it for me???

Originally Posted by stevel

Well, it's square - it doesn't swing - but is it supposed to? I did find it happy though - even though there's a minor part. I think the only thing about GPO is it can give you kind of a false impression - especially on those low notes and the LH chords you have in places - have a real live pianist play this and make sure that things you hear clearly in GPO aren't muddy in real life and vice-versa.

It is supposed to swing but GPO doesn't, I admit to that. I tried several options in Finale but can't make it sound like I want. Actually I can't wait to play this myself as I think it's a fun piece to perform (well it should be at least, that's what I had in mind). In any case it amplifies a happy mood (for me).

Originally Posted by stevel

I don't think it needs more - in fact, I think it needs less! I'd eat that repeat bar. What you might consider is, if you feel you need to repeat - repeating back to the mode change at m.21 (thanks for including the PDF by the way - it's so much easier to discuss when you can see the bars). Otherwise, you might consider repeating back to m.9 instead of all the way to the beginning.

The ending is a little abrupt I think - it seems like you didn't know how to stop, and just stopped. And then you thought, naw, that's too abrupt, I'll add a couple of notes.

Well, the repeat wasn't there at first but then it seemed so.....ahum....short (sorry, was being affected by the big symnphonies and sonatas in here again). The main setup (m.1 - 8) was sitting there on paper for a month or so before I knew how to continue at all, then, when it got going I had a problem how to stop or develop it.. The last notes are supposed to be just a little echo.

Originally Posted by stevel

You've got an interesting mix of what seems like motives and concepts from Bach's 2 part inventions but in a "classical" style. But what works is that there's a nice distribution of material between the hands that maintains interest.

I think this is a great example of how you can write something - for lack of a better term let's call it "basic" - and short, and in one key area, and have the music maintain interest - in fact, I think that's one of the major flaws of most composers - they're constantly seeking to make things more interesting by making it busier - more chords, larger chords, more parts, etc.

Again Thankyou Steve. Apparently there is more Bach inside me than I recognize myself. I always loved Bach's work and more specifically canon's and fuga's as they represents complexity and order in the parts and yet create a nice flowing music that is only truly complete when all parts fit together. The end result does not feel mathematic...

Originally Posted by stevel

A couple of notation points:

I know I trust Finale too much when it comes to notation, specially since I'm not formerly trained to do the notation perfectly, so I do not recognize these things at all. I laready happy that it's readable (in contrast to the actually handwritten version I start with; I still write everything by hand first and put in Finale for checkup and cleanup afterwards).

Originally Posted by stevel

Good Job Peter!

Thanks Steve, and again thanks for listening and taking the time to comment! I really appreciate it.

Peter

[stevel]

Thanks Steve. I'm sticking to writing small pieces for piano as my attention span isn't that great either and I do want to be able to bring it to live myself one day, so making a symphony is out of the question; where the hell do I find an orchestra foolish enough to play it for me???

Hehe - I do the same thing - I just like writing things I can do fairly quickly because my attention will drift to something else.

It is supposed to swing but GPO doesn't, I admit to that. I tried several options in Finale but can't make it sound like I want. Actually I can't wait to play this myself as I think it's a fun piece to perform (well it should be at least, that's what I had in mind). In any case it amplifies a happy mood (for me).

Finale does have a way to swing it - is it just that you can't find a setting that works?

Well, the repeat wasn't there at first but then it seemed so.....ahum....short (sorry, was being affected by the big symnphonies and sonatas in here again). The main setup (m.1 - 8) was sitting there on paper for a month or so before I knew how to continue at all, then, when it got going I had a problem how to stop or develop it.. The last notes are supposed to be just a little echo.

Yeah - I was telling this to someone else posting here - In my opinion it's a bad idea just to plop in a repeat to "make it longer". You should only repeat (anything) if you're positive it merits repeating. Repeat bars are especially dangerous because it's typically an exact repeat. My preference (though I've used repeat bars when I think necessary) is to repeat things a different way - different dynamic second time through, different orchestration second time through, and so on. But I think one should always check their music to see if any repeats really do need to be there.

Again Thankyou Steve. Apparently there is more Bach inside me than I recognize myself. I always loved Bach's work and more specifically canon's and fuga's as they represents complexity and order in the parts and yet create a nice flowing music that is only truly complete when all parts fit together. The end result does not feel mathematic...

I especially did NOT feel that this particular example was mathematical, so I think you outdid Bach in a good way :-). I think you have a nice balance of complexity and simplicity.

One critique - for me personally, I'd be interested to see how you handled a little more chromaticism. The one time the F# comes in is a really nice "cool" moment 0 it might be nice if that (or something like it) happened more than once. I almost wanted to tell you earlier that it might be cool if you sort of "pre-introduced" the minor section by adding some Ebs or Bbs, or Abs in a sneaky way, or, when going back to major, doing the same with E A and B. However, I kind of like the way you go "right there" without a transition. But maybe you might think about this as a possible way to incorporate some chromaticism in a different way than "out of key" chromaticism the next time you do major/minor duality like this. I find some of the most interesting tonal pieces to be ones that hover between major and minor, and kind of keep you on the edge of your seat (though too much of that can get boring too).

I know I trust Finale too much when it comes to notation, specially since I'm not formerly trained to do the notation perfectly, so I do not recognize these things at all. I laready happy that it's readable (in contrast to the actually handwritten version I start with; I still write everything by hand first and put in Finale for checkup and cleanup afterwards).
Thanks Steve, and again thanks for listening and taking the time to comment! I really appreciate it.

That's a good practice Peter - I still do a lot by hand. And yes, Finale is a TOOL - it has been designed to do virtually anything, but, there are still some things the user has to know about to make come out according to tradition. I studied and taught Notation, but one of the things I found for myself and others is just simply looking at other published scores and taking notice of the notational aspects - i.e. looking at the music for how it "looks" graphically, rather than what things the symbols represent. Just taking the time to notiche how most publishers handle key signatures at a key change can be very informative.

Best,
Steve

[crimson]

I heard hints of classical influences in this piece, which I liked. The music is very flowing and "wavy" (I'm referring to those gradually rising melodies). The beginning didn't hit me so hard, but getting nearer to the middle of the piece I started liking it a lot when more voices started blending together. I think this is a happy piece, but with a touch of seriousness like in the second theme/part. A good work in my opinion!

[PeterG]

Originally Posted by crimson

I heard hints of classical influences in this piece, which I liked. The music is very flowing and "wavy" (I'm referring to those gradually rising melodies). The beginning didn't hit me so hard, but getting nearer to the middle of the piece I started liking it a lot when more voices started blending together. I think this is a happy piece, but with a touch of seriousness like in the second theme/part. A good work in my opinion!

Crimson, thanks so much for that.

The seriousness almost always sneaks in in my pieces. As well as the need for a more happy contrast in my more serious / sad / negative work. Ying-Yang, I suppose..... or: I like contrasts.

For the classical influences the same thing; they always sneak in as I'm a big fan of Mozart, Beethoven, but also Mendelssohn and Schubert ! (magnificent fantasy-piece for piano I'm addicted to at the moment (op.103, D.940) download the mp3 here: http://www.jmc.co.il/musicfile.asp?mid=7) or sonata in A minor D.784...

Again thanks,

Peter

[PeterG]

* ahum *