Back With A New Song

Hey I'm back with a new song!! It's weird but comments and constructive criticizm is welcome. I haven't named it yet but any suggestionsa are ok too. (It's 2 Violins, a Viola and a Cello)[attachmentid=2833]

If you want people to take the time to review your works from now on, you should provide some explanation of them:

Rules for posting

mmmm.... i think you could care more about creating some more differentiated textures and leading the whole to some climaxical points here and there. the whole piece seems a bit random and without really contrasting sections of tension and relax. the impression i had is of a horizontal frieze all the same throughout. your hamonies could be also more varyied to make for contrasting moods. regards!

OK Mike here you go

Goal/Inspiration of composition - To write a song that is different than anything/not really any inspiration, just came to me
2. How long it took to compose the piece - around 2 weeks, on and off
3. Obstacles when composing - Harmonizing parts
4. Summary of overall piece - kind of mysterious/weird/sci-fi kind of song with weird and hard fingerings and flats (in D Flat Major)

Hey. Like Frantz said, a bit more structure would have helped about asides from that...

The opening section, I had no idea what was going on but like your bravery of trying something in 7/4 (reminds me of the closing bars of Stravinsky's Firebird). Like the moving of melodies in and out of different instruments though the cello was left to provide quite a few ground notes. Maybe spruce this up a bit?

Listening to the bit at 1:50 now, really like the sound of this. I guess you wanted the accompanying strings pizz ... if not, I would seriously suggest it cause it sounds very dancy and it would add it to. If you do choose to do that, I would also suggest to place some double or triple chords in there to flesh it out amongst the instruments. Shame about the length of this idea, I felt you could have expanded it a bit more.

You ues your motifs well as the piece progresses but I was a bit unsure of the section around 4:00. Didn't impress me that much but then again, I'm a full on Romantic era person. The constant use of thirds was a bit boring, maybe use different interval patterns elsewhere? Some of the double stops on the cello are a bit awkward.

To be honest, I was a little confused at the whole thing. Sorry if this was a crappy response

Piece Redone
OK I split the piece into 4 mvmnts and redid the melodies and stuff here they are





[attachmentid=3077]
[attachmentid=3078]
[attachmentid=3079]
[attachmentid=3080]

Ok J, I'll take a stab.

Four movements - All in the same key (signature), same time signature, same tempo, same dynamic (one dynamic, I can't help but notice), same articulation (that would be none), etc... Maybe you should put them all back into one peice.

Why did you put it all in 7/4? You NEED to have a reason for picking such a time signature. Oh, I don't know? ..something like .."It's easier for musicians to read this peice in 7/4 because there is an overarching feel of a down beat every 7 beats." I'd say It looks more like an arbitrary decision that you made because you somehow found the time signature tool; and yes, sometimes it seems to have dictated where you put the black dots, but many times it doesn't . Like in movement two where you get this um-pah thing going over many bars. Um-pah is a duple thing. I.e. put it in 4/4 or 2/4 for a while.. I don't know that I'd want to be the musician reading that that in 7/4. I'd beg you you to put it in four for 10 or 12 measures. Generally speaking, musicians would prefer their music in separate measures of 3 and 4 alternating rather than what you have. Even 5 and 2 could be preferable. You need to get inside the head of the musicians that might play a peice like this. Have you every performed a peice in 7/4?

Not that you need to have a melody to make music, but... if you don't, it can very quickly turn into meandering dots on the page with no meaning in thier little black-dotty lives. Now you may think you have a bunch of melodies in there, but I barely recognize consistent use of the simplest of motifs in your pieces. And there's certainly nothing I'll walk away from my computer humming after I write this critique.

I reccomend that you try taking a simpler appoach to composition. Try writing a single melody, harmonize it, and think about what performer(s) might enjoy playing and how they might prefer to see the music presented.

Good luck.

I agree with leightwing on a lot of points. I think he pretty much has his head screwed on tight when it comes to musical knowledge, so you should listen to him . Reguarding the time signature, I really think you could EASILY transpose this to 6/4 or 6/8. Maybe even 3/4 if you really felt like it. The point is...it doesn't feel like 7/4. You can look at it as a hemiola, but i highly doubt that was your intention.

Requarding the piece itself, I think your overall feel is pretty good. However all the details like you know...the notes, are kind of skewed. What I mean by this is: you have a good idea of what your piece should sound like, and the mood of it is almost there, but when you go put it on paper, it almost fails.

It's a rather dissonant piece, whether this was intentional or not, but i thought it was kind of cool. 7/4 + dissonance = . It grabs your attention, which is good, but it really kinda gets [<--boring]. I don't think this piece had any kind of form, which is ok, but it was kind of pointless. It's hard for me to say that because every piece of music has a feel, so it has a point, but what I guess I'm trying to say is it didn't go anywhere. Dissonance can be cool and all, but bunches of unnecessary randomness just...doesn't make for good music. .


I think if you keep at it, you could become a decent composer. Study some Schoenberg if you're going down the dreaded path of atonalism (as i like to call it), but even Schoenberg knew what he was writing, pure dissonance or not.

~Nico

Well I agree with both of you and I think this piece should have been in the experimental section cuz honestly, that's what it was. I didn't randomly pick 7/4 and I have played in it before but it did get weird in some parts. I admit this piece is confusing, but I wouldn't (and I'm not saying you did) say all that stuff on one piece that I wrote because it was very diiferent from what I usually do. I really wasn't into this as much as I was with other songs but I don't know, I thouhgt it could go somewhere but it didn't. I think a player would be interested to play a piece like this, even though it is hard but its very different. I think it would be a fun to play around song not a performance song. I hope I didn't come off as this is my style because it's not I just want to tell you.

N.S. Canzano you have reviewed some of my other songs, your right I do have to study up because I feel like a new comer (and I am) surrounded by a bunch of people who are proffessional. All I want is for music to be music, not too technical, because if it was then it wouldn't be enjoyable to me as much as it used to be. I mean it's good that my music is getting out ther and being critiqued, as long as it doesn't ruin the fact that it is music and just music. This piece didn't really have much inspiration or much soul so it was ok that you guys really drove it into the ground.

I see where you're coming from, but music is never "just music". If you delete all the technicalities, I guess that's what it is, but you don't want people to hear your music as "just music". Every piece is special, even this little experiment of yours.

I look forward to hearing your other music.

~Nico