Attempt No. 2

This is just as advertized, a second attempt at making a chamber ensemble work. I've experimented with only a few techniques this time and so it's a bit more cohesive IMO. However, I'm curious about how people feel about changing from genre to genre. Does it work for you, or would you rather I stayed in one style. With each section, I am using thematic material either from the beggining or the preceeding section.

I'm much happier with this than with my first attempt. I'm very happy with the material in the middle. There are only a few places where I haven't quite achieved what I wanted, but I can work on them. The switch to a more romantic style at the end lasts too long on the recording. Note that in the score I stopped earlier - I want to 'switch gears' - maybe drawing on more contemporary harmonies.

Also comments on dynamics would be appreciated. Finale forces me to keep the horns soft pretty much all the time, which I guess is similar to the real world. I could bring the faders down on them but keeping them where they are is forcing me to be delicate. So.. Is what you hear in the mp3 indicative of what you see in the score dynamics wise?

This took about a week to write - mp3 is here.

Or here:

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...?bandID=526079

thanks for listening -

I enjoyed the piece. I honestly didn't hear the shift in harmonic language as being that drastic. I think the parts are so independent that it smooths over this nicely. I liked mm. 18-19, and was waiting for you to recapture and take that motion further, but it never went there. I think it lies flat without something along those lines. Basically, where's the contour of the piece?

This really isn't a 'chamber' work, its really for more a of a smaller orchestra. A chamber orchestra, I guess. I noticed that you expressed some concern about it sounding romantic for too long. However, nothing about this struck me as romantic.

Overall, I'd say that this piece lacks a unifying, cohesive element. Usually, in a composition there is some element, whether it be rhythm, melody, harmony, countrapuntal devices, etc or combination of elements that holds a composition together. It felt like this composition began in the middle of something and ending in the middle of something.

What I would suggest is thinking about the shape of the composition as a whole. For example, you could structure the work to reach a point of climax, and to acheive this climax take not only dynamics into account, but also register, harmony, and instrumentation.

Also, it really needs a better title than attempt. no.2! It sounds like you're trying to apologize or something with that title.

Thanks guys, I agree - It really shouldn't be in the 'chamber' section. The more I think about what the makeup of this ensemble should be, the more I realize it needs at least 6-8 violins, perhaps 4 violas, 3 cellos, and 3 basses. And yes - it's not cohesive, although maybe not for the reasons you mention Nightscape, but perhaps because (at least in my mind) I change styles every 8 measures or so.

The title, "Attempt" is my way of expressing that it's not really a work meant for performance so much as it is an study of different textures and ideas. Meas. 1-9 are somewhat serial, though not atonal per se. M.10-23 are tonal in a contemporary style, with notquitejazz/polychordal harmonic devices. I'm realizing that perhaps it's just stylistically too schizophrenic for listeners - but there are cohesive elements:

The long tones in the horns and oboe.

The four motifs played by the horn and trumpet in M. 3,5-6,7, and 9 are employed all over the place from M. 9-23.

The 16th-16th-8th note motif is used extensively - augmentation(1/4, 1/4,8th)retrograde (8th-16th-16th), etc. - as well as accented in the timpani.

The string 'effect' from measure 6 reappears in places, in different ways = M. 16, beat 4; M. 19- viola, M. 20

In fact, the more I look at it, the more 'cohesion' I find.

But M. 25 to the end is highly tonal and boarders on romantic, no?

I know it sounds like I'm trying to defend my work, but please be specific if you can about what makes it lacking in cohesion. I just outlined briefly what I think are unifying elements. Are they not clear enough? It's not a complete work by any means, and I suppose if I were to use it in a major work, I would re-use 'chunks' of it.

Thanks for your comments.

Hi again,

Very nice.

I don't think it lacks cohesion - at least not to my ears. Perhaps I'm more acclimatised to shifting tonal centres though it's fairly constant. Various motifs are developed and the rhythmic patterns help hold it together. I wasn't even aware of specific genres, perhaps because motifs provide the necessary continuity. Maybe a moment's jazz at bar 5 or am I imagining it - had a sort of jazz sound to the horn part. It was only in the last couple of bars that something sounding out of place, slightly baroque(!).

The dynamics were apparent though sometimes a starting dynamic at pp was lost: I supposed you were "fading in" (eg violas 2nd* & 5th bars of P2).

*I love the tonal centre it settles on around here.

(I reckon you might just about get away with the flute/oboe scoring in these same bars - bottom C# is about the lowest you can get on the oboe to balance with the flute there - notice you gave it a 'p' against the flute 'mp', the conductor would sort out the balance there. In any event, the flute would strike an entry first so would be noticeable.

M

Frankly, I quite liked the first attempt too. It seemed more variable rhytmically - perhaps because the notion of a steady meter was broken up by rapid/sudden passages contrasting with sustains.

M,

Baroque DUH - Of course! - And come to think of it, most of the motific development stops at that point because I start using the vocabulary of such a highly stylized idiom - so, it really is out of place. I think I was just so suprised becuase is sounded good to me as I was writing it and I didn't want to let go

Yes, pp dynamics in the violas at the point you mentioned was an oversight by me, or maybe just not well thought out. As I was writing the thing, I kept kicking up the dynamics a notch here and there and probably didn't catch that. You certainly did.

Yes, its a nice groove on page two and I hate to leave it, but I feel a responsibility not to bask in the glory of the moment too much. Hmm.. if I ever decide to become a lazy composer I could take up minimalism.

Winds, strings, horns - Heck, orchestral instruments in general, are not my area of expertise - my roots are more in the folk, rock, jazz, classical guitar, and choral areas - Although in the last two or three years I've been able to arrange things for my 7-9 graders in a very small ensemble (usually 4-10 players of random instruments) at the school I teach at. - So I'm getting a bit of a feel for how the flute gets lost in the lower octave - or how a bad trumpet player can blow the rest of the ensemble off thier chairs at his lowest volume, which starts at about mf.

But I have to admit that Finale with the GPO instruments pretty accurately (from the perspective of my limited experience) gives you an idea of what it will sound like as you score it. The mp3 that you listened to was generated directly from the score as you see it - e.g. just from putting the notes, articulations, dynamics, etc. where you see them. I have been impressed. I mention this because I know you have a bit of a bad taste in your mouth with the free (teaser) version.

Oh yeah, Thanks for mentioning my first attempt. - I went back and listened to it and was suprised that it held up against this effort. Oh well.. so much for improvement.

Thanks again for your comments - they are much appreciated.

Basically, where's the contour of the piece?

J,
I went back and read your comment - and I think this is a valid question. I guess the short answer is: There isn't one - And I have to admit that as I was writing it, I didn't have it in mind at all. - Obviously, it's through composed. I need to start paying more attention to this on my next attempt.

Thanks again for your comments

-L

Now that you have mentioned it is not really for performance, but rather a 'study' for a possible future larger work, I can appreciate this more.

But if that's the case, shouldn't this be somewhere else? I'm not sure where, but when I review a piece in here, I expect it to be complete to some degree.

As this piece progresses, I find that it becomes more stable - this is perhaps why you like the middle section best. Now that I have relistened, I can hear the occasional device that makes me think that this is a cohesive piece to some extent. I think if you do what you say, develop this or use pieces of it in a larger work, this could become quite an interesting piece.

But I still fail to hear any romantic element in this, even if one puts a a few bars or so of 'traditional' harmony, it won't sound that way in retrospect of what proceeded it - in fact it tends to sound even more bizarre! This is certainly a contempory piece through and through, if you used a more unusual ensemble I would even call this postmodern.

Winds, strings, horns - Heck, orchestral instruments in general, are not my area of expertise - my roots are more in the folk, rock, jazz, classical guitar, and choral areas........[/b]

Then I know who to watch out for when I write something jazzy....!

But I have to admit that Finale with the GPO instruments pretty accurately (from the perspective of my limited experience) gives you an idea of what it will sound like as you score it. The mp3 that you listened to was generated directly from the score as you see it - e.g. just from putting the notes, articulations, dynamics, etc. where you see them. I have been impressed. I mention this because I know you have a bit of a bad taste in your mouth with the free (teaser) version.

Ha! Well, it opens finale files (though still a pain because I can't change the zoom level, scroll the score, etcetera, while it's playing). Still, I can see the score. Shame I can't write music with it!
I have this dread that if I bought it I'd suddenly get an error message saying, "Uh, no! You cannot have more than 20 accidentals with this version...but for another $200...."
I can't fault your reasoning - an instrumental trial, however approximate, must be better than a piano run-through and those instruments are pretty accurate. .I don't know how comprehensive the sounds are or whether you can switch articulations easily but at least they give a fair idea of how a piece sounds. I begin to realise though that no set of samples gives you everything....a Holy Grail job!

By the way, I liked those violas fading in from pp. I thought your intention was to start them inaudibly then swell them up a bit.
all the best,
M

I honestly am not a fan of contemporery music...but this piece does have a lot to offer. I couldn't pick out a theme though, and if it were to be performed for an audience it would come as an absolute shock and I don't think that they would be able to appreciate it. Kind of like when Stravinsky premiered his "Rite of Spring" which remains today one of my absolute favorite ballets of all time. He does have thems in that piece though. Just my input...keep up the good work.