Christmas Anthem

Hi, I'm new on this forum. This is my first piece of any real substance and size, and I did start it around Christmas, but it took me about three months to write. Far too long, as far as I'm concerned, but I don't think it's too bad all in all. It's written for Brass and SATB choir- I hope this is the right place. There are probably numerous problems in my composition, so feel free to point as many mistakes as you want- I'm sure there are many. I would appreciate any comments at all- this is my first post.christmas anthem.MID

christmas anthem.MUS

Hello sir!

I have had the pleasure of listening to your work. I do not think of myself as an authority enough to comment anyone properly, but I'll do my best...

This piece of yours is (to me, at least) reminiscent of the pre-baroque choral music. It is based entirely on single key, with the exception of the subdominant's dominant (that is, the diminished subtonic) in that rising sequence, which is, also due to the melodic lines of the voices, very much giving that modal feel to the piece. Looking at the instrumentation as well, I guess that was your idea all along - in which case, congrats, you made it!

Only one thing captured my attention as being slightly awkward: the ending itself, that long timpani tremolo. In my opinion, you should end with a corona on tonic, since timpani tremolos in that manner are usually a way of ending large-scale work, mostly in XIX century romantic style. When those are presented here, it gives a slight feeling of the end being "bigger" than the rest of the piece. Also, judging by the pieces I listened to (and some that I wrote), it is common to use the following formula when writing such endings: those two short chords atop of the tremolo (bars 116, 118) are usually 6/4 tonic chords (in your case - d-g-h), because the tonic that rests on the dominant (as is the case in this chord) sounds unstable, and gives the feel of the need for resolution, which is then, later, achieved through the use of the tonic that lacks the third (in your case - g-d-g) an octave below the previous two chords (in your case: d-g-h, d-g-h, g(below the dominant d in the previous chord)-d-g), because the use of the chord that lacks the third (that is, only has tonic and fifth) in the low registry really gives that "grounding" feel after which there is nothing else left to say. I hope I didn't write too much

Hmmm, I think you are being too rough on yourself. There are no "problems" here... I mean, no one would judge your piece compared to something not of it's genre. Given the fact this your firstborn, and that it is, I believe, meant to sound archaic, there is no problem whatsoever. You have well captured the holiday spirit in the sound that is similar to the old sound of choral music.

However, this is the first step, meaning, there should be a second one, as well. So, move on. Challenge yourself with something more difficult, experiment. My theory is that a composer doesn't need to like all music, but needs to try all music. I have a friend whose time stopped in 1791. with the death of Mozart, and who denies almost everything that appeared afterwards. Don't be like that.

Thanks for commenting, but seriously, I've had no other formal music theory training than looking up what I want to know and an easy music theory course, so your entire third paragraph made only a little sense to me. And about this piece being modal, well, sure, perhaps it is, but I did not write it as such a piece. Just out of curiousity, what ending would you recommend?

I know exactly what you are talking about, I am also mostly self-educated, so I appreciate your piece even more knowing this. My best advice would be to fuel your art with enthusiasm, will and creativity, and to push yourself ever on. That way the results will never fail to appear.

As for modality - the main characteristics of an old church mode is the absence of clear harmonic functions, tonal gravity, which has as its consequence a pretty liberal melodic line in all the voices. The age of modality is the age of vocal contrapunct: the accent is on the melody, not harmony. Also, you have mostly used only the main functions: tonic, sub- and dominant, and those represented as triads - that in effect has produced a very stable feel to the whole piece, which is also a characteristic of modal music (since the compositions were always in one mode alone). If you are interested in any of these topics, it will be my pleasure to share what I have learned.

As for the ending, that is easy: simply delete the tremolo, and all the chords after the bar 116 (leave the one in 116, though), and put a corona to prolong the chord, giving the music a feel of halt.

I hope I have been of use, sir!

Probably the one thing that sets this piece back the most is your usage of text. I could not follow along to save my life because the words line up in very strange ways. It doesn't match up with regular speech at all, and that can get pretty confusing unless you are using it for an effect.

In some places you have the chorus singing "Al-le-lu-ia, -le-lu-ia" which is a bit confusing. You'd be suprised how much simpler it will be to read it as "Al-le-lu-ia,Al-le-lu-ia" with the "ia" and "Al" on the same note. This will sound basically the same, but will be much easier to read.

Also, there are parts where your meter gets in the way of the text. The text here is very important, as it is the choirs of angels singing. Therefore, it has to be clearly understood. In order for a singer to sing this, they will be putting accents in all the wrong places. I would consider playing around with the time signature a bit more to get a clearer understanding of the text.

Finally, do you really need that many Alleluias? Especially if you're just going to break the word up like that. You should think about extending the word over a longer phrase, rather than having each note represent a different syllable. I would like to see some more mellismatic passages in this work.

About the text-

My sincerest apologies. What you're seeing there might be just carelessness on my part or a glitch in the finale program. It was too frustrating to fix because it would change the text in a different line than I was editing. For the most part, the soprano and alto have the same text and the bass and tenor have the same text.

That wasn't really the concern. My concerns were that the text is not presented in a correctly stressed way. This isn't entirely simple to describe. If you are writing in 3/4, which you have done, the strong beats will be on beat 1 of every measure. So it will be 1 2 3 1 2 3, so you will want the strong syllables to line up on the strong beats. For instance, in the phrase "Christ is risen," you might like "Christ__ is ri-sen" but not, "Christ is ri-sen" because that puts the emphasis on the wrong syllable. However, if you were to change that measure into 4/4, the stress would be on the 1st and 3rd beats, and the same text would be, "Christ is ri-sen". I think if you go back and consider your text in this way, you will understand why it is so confusing.

Another example: the strong syllable in the word "Alleluia" is the middle syllable "lu", the way you have it phrased is "Al-le-lu-ia" which is problematic and confusing. Let me know if you have any other questions. I'd be glad to help.

Thanks for the pointers on lyrics, Nighingale. I'll keep them in mind the next time I write something for choir. I guess it only makes sense that the lyrics and music should go hand in hand with neither overpowering the other (especially the music).

wow, what an enthusiastic composition! loved!

I honestly think that this work isn't bad at all and definately has potential. I am not entitled to critique, but I am sure if you revise it and take into account Nightingale's comments on word setting, - it should have a good effect!