Tango (continuing to be addicted)

[ttw]

http://www.mediamax.com/sudoplatov/Hosted/tango716.mp3

[stevel]

Originally Posted by ttw

http://www.mediamax.com/sudoplatov/Hosted/tango716.mp3

Tony,

How nice.

Though I'd like to refer you to www.tangosanonymous.com.

:-)

Seriously though, well done.

I have a couple of suggestions for you:

1. The +6 chord in m. 32 sticks out like a sore thumb. I think there are a couple of reasons for this:

A. Usually, the b6 is approached by a chord with b6 in it - since you're in Major, the approach from ii is a little abrupt. I see how you have A/F expanding to Ab/F# but of course since they're so fat apart, it's not the sound I think you were going for, and very often the Ab OR the F# are approached chromatically, not both. If they are BOTH approached, the approach is typically from IV6 rather than what ends up being a ii6/4 here.

B. +6 are *usually* Ab C Eb F#, Ab C D F#, or Ab C (C) F# being German, French, and Italian respectively. Here you have a French basically, but the E natural in the RH is really in conflict with any of the "standard" types. Because the rest of your harmony is pretty "standard" this one chord sounds "wrong" by comparison. It sounds like, "hey, this guy does a real good job of handling diatonic chords, but doesn't understand chromatic chords". etc.

C. In all cases, your LH chord is a nice "open" 6th or 5th, and even the A/C thirds are nice and "open" sounding. Now you've suddenly got a F#/AB D cluster - you've got a M2 (o3 of course) and an +4 in there. It's really "clashy-sounding" compared to everything else you have (not to mention the tritone in the RH on the downbeat).

So I think what you were going for here is very nice, but it could be executed better. Maybe try just an Italian +6 (Ab C F#) for the harmony and keep it "open" as the others, and use the D in the melody - if you use the E in the melody, try both the Eb and the En. Remember that often in Major, a German +6 is spelled Ab C D# F# and the D# rises to the En of the following I6/4 chord (which is what you follow it with). So you've got a nice opportunity here for some chromatic lines. You might also consider prefacing the F# with a V/V chord, or the Ab with a iv (minor iv or even bVI) or a run like ii - V/V - +6, or IV6 - iv6 - +6 to smooth out the approach.

2. I think you have a typo in m. 20 beat 3 - the othes are E/C and here you have G/C - you may have meant E/C like the other C chords.

3. I think you have a typo (or a wrong note :-) in m. 58, 4th 8th note RH - you have written a Bb (and that was played as well). It *should* be B natural (should if you're following the kind of conventions you've already set up :-).

4. Final measures. If it were me (and it's not), I'd just have two stacatto chords on beats 1 and 3 and the long chord like your final measure, or, I'd have the "original" tango rhythm in the LH (as in m. 57) rather than the "reversed" one (as in m. 54). It's kind of "mistake-y" sounding (and I realize you've done it in all the other endings - and maybe that's another reason this one should be different). After all that straight 8th note build up, it either sounds like the LH 3rd 9th note of the penultimate measure is a mistake, or the RH forgot to keep going. You might try a couple of options and see if there's anything you like better. But I could get used to it as is :-)

5. Here's something that's just a little picky for me, but I thought I'd throw it out there. When you go to the Major section, you use the same LH "lead in" as in m. 3, 16th note pickups to beat 4. To be honest, I was hoping for something different - or rather I felt kind of "cheated" when it was the same. In a sense, it made me feel all of the sudden like "oh, this is just a simple "folk" arrangement someone has done" rather than my feeling that this was more of a "concert" piece (a feeling which the music up until that point had given me). So my ears are asking for a little variation no only in the RH part (and mode) as you have, but in the LH too. I think the lead in or "connector" idea is warranted, I just feel like I expect not to be so identical to the ones I've heard earlier. Does that make sense?

6. I'm slightly (only slightly mind you) concerned about the stretch in m. 10 and places similar. I wouldn't be able to hold the high F (beat 3) and play the Eb 16th in the inner part (M9th). I'd have to take the Eb with my LH (which I'd be OK with since the LH Cs are staccato). But you might consider shortening the high F tied over note to just an 8th note (beat three soprano) or since that's your melody and you may not want to interrupt the line, the Eb might be changed to G or something. Otherwise, you eliminate all of use "small-handed" pianists (including legions of younger students) from playing this.

7. Along a similar line, in the next measure (11 and similar places) in the RH you have the Bn/D pair. Later, the inner part rises through those notes. This is not a big deal at all, and just one of my own quirks (but one many people share). In reality, you can't hold the B and D while the inner part runs through those notes. The solution is of course just shorten your whole note to a dotted half, or tie it over to the first 16th down beat of beat 4. It's kind of a common piano convention though, so no one would really care (they probably will have released the whole notes anyway by then, or they will have stopped sounding enough to matter). I'm just a notation freak.

8. And speaking of inner voices, that brings me to my final comment (aren't you glad!). You've got this really nice 3 and even 4 part texture throughout (I'm considering the Tango accompaniment to consist of both a "bass line" and a "chordal" part). You really abandon this in the first part of your Coda, and it sounds a little "bare" by comparison. Even though you've got thirds in the RH, it seems like that "inner part" is missing. It's also new material which is a strike against it. Not until you get to the familiar in 57 does it seems to come together. I really like the straight 16ths in 55 and the build at the end. But it seems like the 4 measures from 51-54 are really kind of "unessential" - or "don't belong". It's kind of like, and no offense, "filler". You might consider some other options there.

So no offense, but I think this piece is like 5 or 6 measures shy from being a PERFECT piece of music (I mean up there with what I would consider anything by one of the "masters"). It just needs a little "tweaking" IMHO. A little tweaking would turn it from Clementi into Mozart if you know what I mean. Of course, it's fine like it is as well. But as I always say - if any of the comments I've made bring up something for you that you also had a question about, then maybe some attention to that part might be in order.

Wonderful piece!
Thanks for Sharing. Oh, and you're now forbidden from writing another Tango for at least 1 year :-).

Best,
Steve

[ttw]

Thanks. I did mean to flatten the E in the Augmented sixth. (I just forgot.) There are other typos you spotted. The CG in the bass was an attempt to avoid doubling a third. It's probably not necessary and interferes with the rest of the structuer.

I'll take a look and post a corrected version later.

[stevel]

Originally Posted by ttw

Thanks. I did mean to flatten the E in the Augmented sixth. (I just forgot.) There are other typos you spotted. The CG in the bass was an attempt to avoid doubling a third. It's probably not necessary and interferes with the rest of the structuer.

I'll take a look and post a corrected version later.

I don't think doubling the third would cause you any problems there.

Steve.

[ttw]

Revised edition will be available when my ISP stays up long enough to allow posting.

The coda isn't really a new theme; it's the previous theme with double speed harmony and melody but the same overall pulse, followed by a quadruple speed harmony then an octuple speed harmony, all derived from the Folia.

[stevel]

Originally Posted by ttw

Revised edition will be available when my ISP stays up long enough to allow posting.

The coda isn't really a new theme; it's the previous theme with double speed harmony and melody but the same overall pulse, followed by a quadruple speed harmony then an octuple speed harmony, all derived from the Folia.

Hmm, sorry I missed it. But if I missed it, will others get it?

:-)

Steve

[ttw]

Revised version.

http://www.mediamax.com/sudoplatov/Hosted/tango716.mp3

[PeterG]

Hi Tony,

Very nice indeed. What can one say after Steve's had his way?

But seriously, I only listened to the revised version to be honest and I sure did like it a lot. I loved to lower basses in there as well as the fact that the left hand notes are longer which gives it more rest and at the same time more uhm "body" ?
Did you play this yourself or is it computer rendering and if the latter, nice sound! How?

Thanks for sharing !

Peter

[ttw]

Originally Posted by PeterG

Hi Tony,

Very nice indeed. What can one say after Steve's had his way?

But seriously, I only listened to the revised version to be honest and I sure did like it a lot. I loved to lower basses in there as well as the fact that the left hand notes are longer which gives it more rest and at the same time more uhm "body" ?
Did you play this yourself or is it computer rendering and if the latter, nice sound! How?

Thanks for sharing !

Peter

It's a computer rendering. (I could have played this 40 years ago; perhaps I'll get my chops back sometime.)

I used Finale2008 with the GPO Steinway. I set the Human Playback to Romantic and with the boxes (on top) "final bars" unchecked, the others checked; on the bottom left "auto expression" and "baroque ornaments" checked, the others unchecked; on the other side, "harmonic cadences" unchecked, the others checked. I set the reverb ambience to whaterver comes up by default and set the "wet" to -10.8 and the "dry" to -0.1. I set the Steinway GPO to +6db.

I think what counts is that the human playback interprets expression marks, loudness, pedals, slurs, etc.

[Ron Ofir]

You did it again I especially liked the second motive (the one starting in m. 10).