Five Hundred Seconds Of Music And Its Purpose for Chamber Orchestra

Hm. Well, learn something new everyday, huh?

I'm digging this. I like the lack of movement and overall slowness. There's a very 60ish character here, certainly, with sounds picked very specifically and put almost isolated from the whole. With that said, I think the strings and the overall structure based on textures (something like Penderecki used to do) work pretty well. The part with the percussion and the quick movement in the winds, etc, can sound a little "Well let's do something different!", but it is a little refreshing. Though I personally would've enjoyed the stillness until the end.

I see some Bartok influence near the end, with the quasi-counterpoint between the instruments. Overall, I'm pretty OK with the ending, and you didn't go for a bow form or any of that so that's also cool to me.

As far as the score and such, I'm not going to say much since it seems clean and I assume it's all properly notated and such.

You could've said a lot more about it, as is usually the case in this forum people don't talk enough about the piece themselves. But oh well.

Other than this, good work, I liked it.

Hi SSc. Thanks for listening and posting.

Glad you liked it.

Originally Posted by SSC

You could've said a lot more about it, as is usually the case in this forum people don't talk enough about the piece themselves. But oh well.

Oh, but I'm usually an open book. In other pieces (exeliksis) I've also posted an analysis of the piece, and after that a review of it...

What would you like to know and I hope to answer it, although I've said a lot of things already about the piece, haven't I? (not the very first post, later on).

Really I'm not sure there's much else to say from my behalf, unless you want to ask further questions, to which I'm free and glad to reply to.

Originally Posted by nikolas

Really I'm not sure there's much else to say from my behalf, unless you want to ask further questions, to which I'm free and glad to reply to.

Well, I'm curious as to how you came up with the structure and how big a role did the system you used to organize your tone material play in contrast to your intuition as a composer. You talked about a scheme of breaking up the 12 tones into groups, and such. Did this have an influence on the overall structure too, or just the tone material?

Plenty of things to ask~

I very usually put structure and form first, as a primary work that needs to be done. This is how I work in many cases.

In this case, the first thing that came to mind was the tetrachords. Then I started with the chords (the 2nd page, the slow part) and after I was done, I thought that I could actually repeat the same process at half time, and then half time again and again. So if you notice first the chords are in the woods, then the strings, and then there is a small mirrored 2 page part. This is repeated as a main process in the 2nd movement (the fast). First the woods have the theme, then the strings and then there is the mirror. 3rd movement (again slow) is pretty much the same things, at half speed. 4th 'movement' is the "resolution" sort of speak.

In order for the other "theme" to work it's way and meet with the form at the 4th 'movement' I went backwards and placed it in the last page, then half back and half back, etc until I reched bar 35, or something.

The number 4 did play a part in the whole thing. 4 movements, tetrachords, 4 sections in each movements. But not much else really, no.

This is actually a very organised and guided piece. Once I got started I finished rather soon, because the form was repeating itself and I "had" to follow the structure. So once I got the idea of the chords, then the chrods in the strings, etc, next thing was already laid out. The "theme" of the 2nd "movement" (fast) is created by all possible variations of the 4 notes of the tetrachord. 1234, 3241, 1324, 1423, etc... Then it's a kind of fugato.

So my intuition as a composer is pretty absent. I didn't change anything after I was done and I do find this rather "wrong", as it is a work that could be presented even by a robot, or computer, with the minimum of input.

I think that I almost overanalysed this work!

Could one say this is a serialist piece? From the point of structure and work with the organization elements, it seems not exactly serialist as in rows and such, but you did create a system which wrote it and you just followed it to a conclusion.

Did the system you create influence also dynamic markings, accents, etc etc? The other musical parameters, rhythm for example?

Not really, it's too free to be a serialist piece, although I'm almost flatered, since at the time I knew pretty much nothing about 12 tone, let alone serialism. And there was nothing to influence rhythms and stuff. Apart from the very very basic place of the 2nd "theme" (the F. Hrn.) which was placed there to meet at the end, nothing else. The first chords which last as long, do so, because... they can hold their breath for so long!

But yes, the system did lead me greatly to a conclusion with minimum of input by me, I said that... Especially the flow movement was done in a single day or so. Second movement took a bit longer to complete, etc. There is a bit of counterpoint, and a streto (the strings in the middle, fast section, which again is pretty mechanic. Entrance point and put it together), etc.

I do like(d) working with systems. It gives you straight guidelines on what to do, etc. If the system is good, it could also work as a listening experience. This does not always happen however...

everything your compose . i already downloaded it
i am your fans for now

darkprincess