|
EnigmusJ4: The clarinet part at H isn't hard. I'm sure if you picked up a clarinet for the first time in your life, you'd be able to play those measures within twenty minutes of practicing. At Letter G...it is loud. I can send you and Mp3 if you'd like. I think it sounds pretty sick. Thanks for the reply!
Mr. Flint-wwrrOkay. On the score-- I initially had everything written out by hand. It's a band full of old people though, and they didn't like reading hand written parts, so I had to type the entire score into Sibelius. Unfortunately I did not have enough time to make the score professionally clean. You are right though, the score is sloppy, I know that--but it gets the job done.
My bad on The pppp on the bassoon in the last measure. I know the lowest they will be able to play that is a mf, but overall I defend that note being in the score because that particular note on the bassoon is full and warm, and in that instance works well with the Tubas.
Trombone Pedal Tones: Not bad. I play Tenor Trombone, and I knew exactly what sound I wanted there. A G pedal sounds just fine on a Tenor instrument if a capable person is playing the instrument. If the whole section could nail those two measures, it would sound awesome.
Play measure 127 on the piano. Does it sound muddy? I don't think so. If the ensemble was attacking and releasing more clearly, I think that issue would be remedied.
Yes, I know the background parts are boring. I have a few good reasons. Firstly, they aren't supposed to draw the ear because they are background (duh). Honestly, I prefer it that way. You can argue with me that aestetics aren't really a good reason for anything, but...let's not go there. The second reason is that I didn't know how much rehearsal time we would have, and I didn't want to write anything that would eat time away from getting the key points of the piece right. In case you couldn't tell from the recording, I'm not exactly working with professional musicians.
The Cues: All of them show what's going on leading up to an important part for a section. They can see what's going on so if they mis-count, they can get back on track. All others are for the sake of doubling, in case people were missing from rehersal.
"Noodles" at letter B: Getting a little repeitive in our criticisms? Maybe you are making a joke, I'm not sure.
As for the 32nd notes...how do they not fit in? If I wrote two whole notes tied together, would that be out of place? As far as I'm concerned, it's a simple straight rythm, just like the rest of the piece.
As far as dissonance...I agree with you, and I don't agree with you. Dissonance has it's place, but not in this piece. As a matter of fact, if I had written more dissonant harmonies, I'm sure you would criticize them for being inconsistent with the rest of the work.
pppp is excessive, I'll give you that. ffff is not. It gets the point across. I can promise you that if I had ff or even fff written there, that section wouldn't sound as good as it does.
Although I appreciate your criticism, the last line is patronizing. You cannot congratulate someone on something and then basically call what you just congratulated weak.
In reply, my best defense for the piece is this: The band loves it, The conductor loves it, the dedicatee loves it, and most importantly the audience is going to love it. I know there are shortcomings, but this piece is a door opener for an entire community. I beleive that had I used more dissonance, a lot people would have been shut off immediately. For a large group of people, this will be their first positive exposure to new music. Isn't that exciting? The music world (especially the concert band world) needs more accessible music that isn't Swearingen.
Isn't this piece a step in the right direction?
|