|
Another critique! Yay! As I said before on your Concerto for Orchestra piece:
“I am not a fan of atonal music. In fact, I am an avid opposer to atonal music simply because music is supposed to be pleasing to the ear and not derived from mathematical formulas. (I refer to serialism and the atonal/polytonal movement of the recent decades.) So thusly, I did not like this piece. It's the style, not necessarily the notes themselves that are bad. And of course some people like that kind of stuff and may tear me to shreds for it, but I say again, I do not like atonal music! So keep that bias in mind while you read this. You have been warned.”
Same applies here.
HOWEVER! This is not a truly atonal piece. It’s more of a “free tonality,” a style that is actually becoming quite popular with older composers who previously were completely atonal and are now adding tonal elements. This piece is mostly based on modes and specific pitches. You may not notice it at first glance, but upon further inspection, the melody, and the whole piece as a result is “freely tonal.” A huge chunk of the piece is based on “F” oscillating with “F#”. If you actually removed all the dissonant notes in the piano, F major or minor chords could be implied. The mode sounded very Arabic with its sometimes major third and flatted 2nd. That’s a big deal in Arab modes that jump from b2 to M3. So I will say that overall I was able to relate to the piece. I think it may have been a tad too long and some of the repeats weren’t necessary. The most compelling thing I thought was the “chamber” feeling the piece. It’s not like most of my chamber works which feel like orchestral reductions (since large ensemble works are my forte).
I won’t be as extensive as my last review because you should know what to look for. Overall the score looks very nice and clean. The Violoncello should go in between the flute and piano. There are several unnecessary “loco” markings, an obsolete marking with the use of dotted brackets on 8va lines. In the piano I’m not too keen on the use of “normale” but I don’t think there is a better alternative. A lot of the grace notes are fine, easily doable on flute. Some of your quadruple stops in the cello might be troublesome. Consult a cellist on this, I don’t know that stuff. “Normale” is also not necessary after flutter tonguing. It’s an understood technique like tremolo on strings. And only 3 slashes, not 4 like sometimes in towards the end. There are also several ¼ bars being used for Grand Pauses. Get rid of them! Only use a whole bar rest. It’s annoying to see a time change when nothing happens in it. Some accidental problems like E#s and so forth. Fix them to make reading easier. Some beaming issues as well, especially with tuplets. Use secondary beams when connecting 16th note triplets to 8ths. Don’t separate them like Sibelius suggests.
Bar 15: getting a Low D fortissimo?! Yeah right! Transpose it up three octaves for true loudness.
Bar 28: “Barbaro”? I dunno about that. Might I suggest a word more commonly known or better yet, an English term? Also “separate marcato”? Marcato means heavily accented and staccato. Separate is unnecessary.
Bar 55: Why optional flutter tongue? It is actually easier to flutter tongue than to trill in that range. And don’t make it optional. Give the players choices then it’s not your composition anymore.
Bar 85: Again, don’t give the flutist options. The upper octave is easily doable by a pro. Leave it there. If it’s an issue, the flutist would omit the grace notes before transposing them.
Bar 115: “Liberemante e lugubre”? Why not try “Liberamente e lugubre” The problem with that tempo marking is there is no tempo marking. It explains feeling but not speed.
Bar 123: More like “Moderato”
Bar 161: “Fuocoso”? Try “Con fuoco”
Last Bar: The sudden minor chord seems very out of place. I would not be so obviously looking for a cadencial ending. End with a bit hit of loud open fifths or a tritone leading to a fifth. But I think only a fifth or a unison will bring closure to the piece given it’s tonal characteristics.
There you have it. You can read my elaborate conclusion on the other thread. I wish you well in the future. I wish you well and good luck in your future compositional endeavors!
[End review]
Oh, and I want to add this mostly for all composers as a small rant. (In no way directed at you Sidd.)
There is a common misconception that winning an award like Morton Gould means that you’re a great composer and that you’re perfect. [Buzzer!] WRONG ANSWER! Let me tell you a story. One day, two brothers decided to expand their start up company and advertised the new job openings. They did so well because over 1,000 applications flooded into their tiny office on the 10th floor of a building downtown. They struggled for days reading through application after application and resume after resume. After a week one brother got so annoyed that he said angrily, “That’s it! I can’t take it anymore!” He picked up over 900 of the applications and threw them out the ten-story window onto the street. His brother protested saying, “What the heck did you do that for?! Those could have been some of the best applicants!” His brother replied pointing to the remaining applications on the table, “Well, at least those were the lucky ones!” True story! And don’t think for a second it’s any different at ASCAP.
[End rant]
|
Jun 30 2008, 1:34 PM
Linear Mode
