I have written a piano piece in e minor. I asked techneut if he would entertain the possibility of recording it. He has since recorded it with both my original and in addition his own version which I like more than what I originally wrote. I am attaching it to this post.



The difference between the original and Chris's version is some of the development and the ending which turns from f to a in the left hand and e to f and c in the right hand. The broken F7 figure is a stretch and the version featured keeps the the main theme with rhythmic attributes but modulates keys before returning to e minor.

Let me know what works, if anything. Is the tempo too slow (it is played here adagio)? Is the development out of place?

Thanks,
-Riley

Hey, you wrote Adagio ! Then that is what you get

Something's not right here. I think the file is too large or something because the progress opening it is way too slow.

Nothing wrong with this file, Eddy. The problem must be at your end.

Yep. It was. Fixed it with a reboot.

Riley, I like this little piece very much, a melancholy kleine klavierstucke. I think as a composition it stands perfectly the way it is! However, it would help not to talk about "development" which is peculiar to sonata forms (excpting it's use in fugal analysis) and implies a "plurality" of keys as opposed to the duality of the exposition and single tonality of a recapitulation. Instead, you mean a "contrasting" section for in fact what I think I'm hearing is a simple 5-part Rondo (ABACA). Nice work!

Edit: corrected spelling of "kleine"

@ Chris Yes, I wrote adagio and you where playing it as it was written, though as I hear the piece again the anticipation from one beat to the next is so drawn out, maybe andante non troppo would have more impact.

@ Eddy Thanks for the kind comparison, I'll have to check out kliene klavierstucke. It looks like PS has a recording of the entire set. Surprised you did not find anything wrong with it. About musical analysis terms expo., dev. and recap. I use these words interchangeably with beginning, middle and end. So a five-part rondo it is, and thanks for the compliment!

-Riley

Riley, I just meant your "little piano piece" nothing more; no specific other work.

Chris, I never mentioned that your playing was sensitive and conveyed the structure clearly. Nice work.

Riley:
A: 0:04
B: 0:32
A: 0:44, transition
C: 0:57, re-transition
A': 1:45 -end

is how I hear it.

I'd have played the same phrasing in another tempo


Thanks. As I said to Riley, this is not a bad little piece. I felt quite at home with it.

Indeed, not bad at all.

Riley,

I just got a chance to hear this composition. Good job.

And Chris you did a beautiful job of playing it.

Scott

I find it impressive on many levels but it doesn't sound like a storm at all to me and not particularly melancholic either. Great playing technique.

Thanks Scott (belatedly...) and differencetone.
@differencetone: I don't think it was supposed to sound like a storm Melancholic, probably.

@ Richard and Scott thanks for the kind words. I don't think this piece would be half as good if it was heard on a computer sequencer.

@ difference tone I do not understand why you you think this piece should sound like a storm. Maybe you are referring to the piece Pukino submitted. If you thought that piece was like a storm you can have your say.

@ Chris I submitted this recording to a composition contest. the contest called for a live recording of an original composition. They said MIDI files would not suffice, so I will find out at the next convocation if the piece won. Will let you know.

That would be nice. I'd have thought it was probably too short for such a contest.