I think I would have notated the first (m. 1-42) and third sections (m. 106-) in 6/4 rather than 2/2. Easier to read quarter notes and half notes than triplets. That said, if you're going to keep triplets, m. 130 should probably be a single, measure-long triplet rather than two half-measure triplets.
The switches from threes to three against two (e.g. m. 15-24) was quite striking. Good work!
The alternating-hand "arpeggios" in m. 70-76 also worked nicely. Up until that point I was finding the 3/4 middle section rather dull. These pseudo-arpeggios absolutely made that section work.
Wow! I am very grateful for your time and attention, even more so for the fact that you took the time to read (play?), analyze and comment on my piece. I really appreciate it a lot.
It helps me a lot to improve and polish myself as a composer.
As for your points, I think you are absolutely right about c.130. I will correct it. You might also be right about other aspects, such as perhaps the measures (6/4 by 2/2). I did not do this for any particular reason, but I did consider it as a stylistic purpose.
I am glad that, in general, you liked my work and found the piece interesting, it motivates me to continue composing and uploading my scores here.
Dear Nino,
Thank you for sharing your "Minueto" with us.
1.) I think that you could have written the 2/2 section in 3/2
and avoid all the triplets. This would be easier to read.
2.) You have written many A flats which don't sit comfortably.
In this key of 4 sharps the A flats should be G sharps.
3.) Later you have G and D naturals this is in effect reducing
it to a 2 sharp key signature. (Like D major)
4.) I think that you present us with too many different ideas.
It would be better if you developed fewer musical ideas.
Generally, a pleasing piece. I hope that you write a No 2.
Jeff
Comments
Nice piece!
I think I would have notated the first (m. 1-42) and third sections (m. 106-) in 6/4 rather than 2/2. Easier to read quarter notes and half notes than triplets. That said, if you're going to keep triplets, m. 130 should probably be a single, measure-long triplet rather than two half-measure triplets.
The switches from threes to three against two (e.g. m. 15-24) was quite striking. Good work!
The alternating-hand "arpeggios" in m. 70-76 also worked nicely. Up until that point I was finding the 3/4 middle section rather dull. These pseudo-arpeggios absolutely made that section work.
Very nice work!!!
In reply to Nice piece! I think I would… by TheHutch
Wow! I am very grateful for your time and attention, even more so for the fact that you took the time to read (play?), analyze and comment on my piece. I really appreciate it a lot.
It helps me a lot to improve and polish myself as a composer.
As for your points, I think you are absolutely right about c.130. I will correct it. You might also be right about other aspects, such as perhaps the measures (6/4 by 2/2). I did not do this for any particular reason, but I did consider it as a stylistic purpose.
I am glad that, in general, you liked my work and found the piece interesting, it motivates me to continue composing and uploading my scores here.
Thanks, my friend.
Dear Nino,
Thank you for sharing your "Minueto" with us.
1.) I think that you could have written the 2/2 section in 3/2
and avoid all the triplets. This would be easier to read.
2.) You have written many A flats which don't sit comfortably.
In this key of 4 sharps the A flats should be G sharps.
3.) Later you have G and D naturals this is in effect reducing
it to a 2 sharp key signature. (Like D major)
4.) I think that you present us with too many different ideas.
It would be better if you developed fewer musical ideas.
Generally, a pleasing piece. I hope that you write a No 2.
Jeff