Just Like RainDrops

hey party people..this is my only fully completed choral peice so i hold it close.I've tried something new that i have seen before in choral music and put in a spoken text part. i re posted it because i may have a chance of recording this soon and i really really want to fix any tweaks or things wrong about it. I Need anybody to comment this tell me what they think and even if someones said it already say it anyway so i'll know how important it is.. please. I wouldn't go anywhere but here for help. thanks a lot


i've posted the pdf,mus,and the audio on the link below.

please tell me wat you think about it.


Just Like Raindrops.mp3 - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

im very excited to hear it, ill listen to it later tomorrow.

I liked it. It was very playful and fun. It seemed at the last two pages it lost its tonal center I dont know if thats what you were going for, but overall I enjoyed it.

Upon one listen, here's my knee-jerk reaction. There's a way to notate speaking, and putting a lyric under a rest is not it. That was rather confusing at first. But it looks like an interesting idea that could be used well.

For those most part, I thought the melodies and harmonies were enjoyable, went fun places, though lacked focus in some points and felt to be wandering.

My biggest thing, and it seemed you only did this in the alto part, but you had them singing WAY too high. Altos up there hitting Fs and Gs? That's got to be re-written, or split the soprano part, but that's way to high to have altos singing. Give them something rich and round to sing under the sopranos. I love that the song starts with alto, right in a good resonating spot, but then you take them all the way up there... not gonna be pretty.

It's very mono-rhythmic, even with the addition of the triplets, and while I understand that it will be somewhat remedied with live performance, it's still something to watch out for. I'd go back and revisit your words. You have a part where you have the tenors come in on the second syllable of "precious," which would work much better as the word "Just" - same vowel, and it makes sense with the line.

High G in the alto line? That'd require a solo-choir with opera mezzos to do. Your average choral alto will not be able to sing that blended. In fact, the whole alto line runs up pretty high. It'd be much better to add a second-soprano part, rather than pull the 1st altos up so much.

You have several moments of beautiful and surprising harmonies. However, you also have these moments where the texture thins very suddenly, with little or no relation to the text that I can see. Consider these carefully.

thanks alot guy i will surely make changes

The G in the alto as well as the high C in the soprano are both probably too high, though the latter you might be able to pull off. Also, you have some weird doublings that seem to have no purpose in spots - like in measure 38, you have the soprano split into divisi to hit a note the altos are already hitting, on the same syllable even. That seems to just be...sloppy is the word that comes to mind. Perhaps you had a purpose for that, but it is definitely not apparent.

And I just noticed the Eb above the staff in the bass - also probably too high. Try to keep all voices but alto within one ledger line above and below the staff. That's certainly not the hard-and-fast rule, but it's a decent estimate most of the time.

thanks a lot dev I don't know why i did that split i just feel like it should be.

and i've been getting a lot of response about the range of the perts and where i take them so i'll be sure to change that
and what did you mean by "through the latter"?

though the latter - as in, the second thing I mentioned - the high C - might be acceptable depending on the choir.

o okay thanks a lot