1. Didja accidentally blow through the whole, "We're using our real names" thing on registration? No problem, just send me (Mike) a Conversation message and I'll get you sorted, by which I mean hammered-into-obedient-line because I'm SO about having a lot of individuality-destroying, oppressive shit all over my forum.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. You're only as good as the harshest criticism you're willing to hear.
    Dismiss Notice

For a concert pianist

Discussion in 'Critique & Feedback' started by Stephen Limbaugh, Jul 26, 2021.

  1. Missouri Waltz Concert Paraphrase

    I think I am going to change that mid-scale mode change in measure 81... unless enough people think it's cool. ...hard to decide!
  2. Hey Stephan !

    First.....Bravo!! You skill is undisputed and obviously have professional level craft. It's nice to see pieces like this getting posted.

    I apologise I have to be brief; Things are busy.

    We have chatted a few times over at VI-C were I post under the alias Dr.Shagwell, so I feel I know a bit about your aesthetic leanings.

    Measure 81 sounded cool to me.

    What caught my ear the very first listen, and then I liked less the 2nd time was from bar 94 to about 100 to 101.

    Sometimes, when it is a fast virtuoso piece, you can get away with a lot. However, since this passage is a repeat and variation of material already heard it
    becomes more notice able.

    From 93- 95 the melody outlines (in F). 5-6-5-4-3-2 ....... The tonal gravity is shifting one way, and while I get you want a surprise I found the solution.... not even according
    to your own ideas from previous conversations. If we strip away all the extra here is the voice leading of your melody to bass note on the downbeat of each measure

    View attachment upload_2021-7-27_14-31-40.png

    Now, there are probably a dozen different ways to vary this passage and still create the same "core" idea you have. I only have time to offer one.

    I felt this passage does not have enough variety of approaches to the down beat of 1.

    Also the F# against the F in 96 seems out of place. I miss the straight line this passage had in the previous section.

    So one idea is to create ambiguity from somewhere else that the righthand; as I mentioned a variety of approaches to the down beat.

    Here are 4 bars for you. First yours as you have it, and one idea to hopefully stir your imagination.

    Best wishes

    View attachment upload_2021-7-27_14-43-22.png

    View attachment upload_2021-7-27_14-43-45.png
    Stephen Limbaugh likes this.
  3. #3 Stephen Limbaugh, Jul 28, 2021
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2021
    I keep a mental list of the few VI-C folks who really know what they are talking about, and always have excellent commentary. I am glad you mentioned your alias because I wrote a private group message thanking/complimenting for such excellent contributions, but your settings wouldn't allow for your tag to be included! So, first off thank you, Dr. Shagwell. When you post, here or there, I really really do take it seriously.

    If I am understanding correctly, I came up with an alternative based on your suggestions.

    Screen Shot 2021-07-27 at 8.49.06 PM.jpg
    (image should expand when clicked)

    Two questions...

    1, should that be a C# in bar 98? Sounds happier to me.
    2, did this give a greater variety of approaches to the downbeats?

  4. A live performance of the finished product.
    Duncan Formosa likes this.

Share This Page