.

Fantastic. Very well written. However, I think you repeated the Melody WAY to many times. Granted, the melody is stuck in my head, but only because I just heard 7 times. Aside from that, it was very good. And It didn't seem all that happy. It seemed very dramatic.

I would like to criticize you on the generic sound, the repetitious passages, the uninspired chord progression and the rhythmically uninteresting melody. However, I won't. I'm going to go with my gut feeling here, and that tells me you're well on your way of becoming a great composer.

I've only listened to one of your songs so this may be inaccurate, but I sense that you prioritize the listener in your writing rather than trying to break new grounds or trying to come off as 'sofisticated and smart', which, from me, is always a point in your direction.

.

.

.

Those were all very good!

Teardrops:
If your going to say the song is in C minor, Don't change Keys midway.

Mvt. 1
Very Good! My personal favorite! Just, the dolce parts, didn't sound so sweet like Dolce implies.

Mvt. 2
Very Good as well. I hated the voice you used though. That killed it for me. But Still very very good. It keeps the mood very well.

Mvt. 3.
Once again, Dolce means sweetly, it really wasn't that sweet at the dolce parts. Aside from that, very good.

.

In Teardrops, you started in C minor, then changed out of it.

In movement one, it says Dolce in measure 17.

An by voice I mean the sound of the instrument. In Mvt. 1, you used an Acoustic Grand Piano, while in Mvt. 2, you used a Bright Piano.

.

Those were all very good!

Teardrops:
If your going to say the song is in C minor, Don't change Keys midway.



It does not really matter, at all; symponies usually say they're in a certain key but then they modulate somewhere in between anyways. As for the pieces, I'll comment later.

.

Hey. I'm just a amateur at composing, and have hardly worked with chord structure, but I'll gladly give you my input.

Teardrops - The song was very moving, and I'm glad I downloaded the mp3, cause the mus file doesn't do it justice.

Candanatto 1 - Very touching song, and the middle part was just beautiful.

Candanatto 2 - Another moving song. The melody was nice and memorable.

Candanatto 3 - Another great song, and not only portrayed happiness, but also sadness.


Great job with your songs, however I would like to hear what it would sound like if the melody was played in a different voice for the second (maybe higher...).

I really liked all of the songs, and can't wait to hear more.

.

Romantic piano pieces! From all three of the nocturnes, the most charming parts were their chord progressions. Very intelligent uses of accidentals and variety of chords! Also, I commend you on the clear notations. However, there are some minor details to be fixed if you want to send it to a publisher. Okay, on the down side, the melodies were sometimes a little too cliched, as pretty as it wants to be. At least your progressions kept me interested nonetheless. Ouch, the third nocturne seems to be a torture for the pianist. A flat minor with so many accidentals. The third nocturne also felt that it could've been more passionate and habanera/tango-like. I think your main concern should be trying to write more than just one style. Yes, all you have written so far are pretty and pleasing to most audience (Yes, there are people like me out there that likes a touch of 'strangeness' in music, so don't be afraid to go beyond what's 'normal'). However, expand your horizon. Try writing in the same voice as yourself but in a different style (i.e. a waltz, a sonata...). Maybe you are doing that, I don't know. But then after listening to your third nocturne, I just felt that you are not giving enough variety to the audience. Nonetheless, all three nocturnes were quite pleasing. Work at it!

PS: Are you from Quebec?

.

.

Ah! Ferderyk! Frederyk! Titan, you completely remind me of myself. You really do. Your influence, and style, is a little like myself. I have to say that you're already one of my favourites of the forum. Be happy, not many are.

Your Candanatti were fabulous. They reminded me a lot of Chopin, but with quite a touch of jazz. You modulations is what snapped you out of that Chopin style. And although I absolutely love your ability to be so comparable to Chopin, you also need to try and experiment away from Chopin. Myself, for example, have improvised and studied many composers styles over the last two years or so, and have learned to embrace them into my own ideas, but to the extent that you know its original. Just don't get "music-soul-searching" mixed up from "I'm-going-to-copy-and-paste." And I'm not saying that about you, either.

Just something to consider, but I really hope to hear more from you.

(Oh and excuse my writing, I have been ill for the past few days--can't think straight)

.

.

A problem: What are the articulations of the violin part? Which notes are slurred and which aren't? You aren't quite clear on that so it sounds very static and expressionless now. Your accompaniment could also be varied, the same rhythm got quite tedious after a while. Also, don't just double the right hand piano with the violin. I guess I would say that I find this piece a step backward from your nocturnes, unfortunately.

.

I liked the progression of this piece, and its mood struck me immediately after the violin introduced itself. The only big setback of this cue is the digital sound. Also, I was hoping for at least one major part near the end.

.

Major as in contrast to minor... not major as in 'big'.

I'm sorry that I can't really give this much criticism, of the lack of everything that a piece has. Melody, harmony, luring, emotion and an idea. This just seems like a clash of uninspired notes, barely thought of when placed. As Noir and Dot have said, this is a set back from your nocturnes. I will not always go back to your nocturnes for reference, but I will on this occasion. Such effort put in the past, should not come short in the future.

Good luck on revising the core of the work, so we can hear more gems emerge. :)

.

Again, the accompaniment ostinato felt tedious after a while. Also, when your want a fortissimo, have some double stops, triple stops or even quadruple stops (preferably open strings so that the string rings and has a bigger impact on the sound). I'll comment more later.

Ok... because both piano duets are pretty much the same (same dynamics and tempo) I'll just group them together, and then write individual comments between major and minor.

Piano Violin Duet - The left hand part, while incredibly interesting, gets dull after hearing it for a while. I like how you tried to switch it up with the triplets and at the vary end. I think the biggest reason it gets dull is because it ends up taking over. Its almost too loud. In the beginning it seems like it should be played sweetly, and slurred. I also found it weird that at measure 12 you have the piano playing ff, while the violin's at mf. The piano kind of drowned out the violin. I also have a really big question... is this supposed to be a violin solo with piano accompaniment, because the repetitive piano part points to that. Overall it was good, and used some really nice harmonies.

Minor - The ferocity of this piece is extremely obvious from the very beginning. The trills work out really well, and sixteenth note runs sound appropriate for the song.

Major - A completely different sound. It sounds more like a light summer day. The trills don't really work out that well, and the double sharps created repeated notes, which felt almost like roadblocks in the way of the violin.

Right now my vote is with the minor, however if you fix the double sharps and trills, than it might sway more towards the major. They're completely different songs, so deciding which one to use will be very difficult. Good luck, and keep up the great work!