Short piece

The "Twelve Tone Composition" that I wanted to have created via collaboration is complete...except, without collaboration. I composed this VERY SHORT prelude for piano using the 12 tone system.

All info you need is in the PDF.
It is a serialist, atonal, dissonant piece so be prepared.

Box.net - Free Online File Storage, Internet File Sharing, Online Storage, Access Documents & Files Anywhere, Backup Data, Send Files
Finale 2007c - [Speirainaol].pdf

That was cute. Though, I would hardly call it atonal. It's surely not function-harmony based, but there's a lot of tonal elements, and the relationship consonance/dissonance is still there.

Specially by the ending, which is practically a regular cadence in disguise.

But yeah, cute. Nice looking score too.

Also, again with the definition of Serialist, which to me is defining a whole lot more rows for a lot more things, such as dynamic, form, articulation, etc.

If you want something to really be in the atonal field, look at how Schoenberg or Webern do it. Dissonances one after the other, no resolution, and almost no repetition of any "motives" any of that. Anything that has a tonal-based foundation is done away with.

Though, like Berg, you can use the 12 tone system, strictly, and still sound somewhat tonal through pauses/repetitions, etc.

Hmm ok
It seems that Atonal is something hard to achieve. Ive seen comments like yours all over the site when someone posts 'atonal' works...so i guess ill have to really think about it when i come to writing another atonal piece.
Thanks for the tips, and i will definately be studying some schoenberg and webern now haha.

Ta.

Why is it whenever someone writes an "atonal" piece and posts it on this site, they have to title it "Atonal Overture" or somehow beat us over the head that it is atonal? You might as well just post the tone row matrix as your title. I didn't listen, but from looking at it, it seems like a moderately successful piece, I'll listen to it later. Just take heed to what I said, because it's not impressing anyone. I doubt that was your intention, but just know how it comes off.

gms5287 is being far too harsh. I don't think it 'comes off' like that particularly.

What twelve tone system did you use? It's evidently not classic Schoenbergian serialism, since chains of notes are frequently repeated; that's what makes it sound tonal, is my first complaint with regards what might otherwise be an interesting composition.

My second complaint is that of rhythmic and dynamic contrast and continuity. I have always found atonal music's 'tonality' incredibly hard to appreciate beyond liking a few of its more interesting, melodic phrases. For this reason, rhythm and dynamics are of the utmost importance. In the case of classic serialism, sometimes this means that if one altered the notes, the piece could be turned into something that sounded tonal and classical. In other cases, it simply means that the piece is rhythmically interesting throughout, despite unusual deviations from precedent.

Volume likewise is crucial; I felt you overused the left hand accent, and had little in the right hand to counter this. Invert (bad choice of word!) some of the phrases so that the right hand gets octave accents, and the left hand staccatto passages.

P.S. Goodridge is not a particularly common name, and I've recently been deciphering some 16th-century Chancery Petitions that involve a legal battle between 'Nicholas Thorne and Robert Goodridge' over the establishment of an ancient public school. The latter has the most scrawly, convoluted and complex handwriting I've ever seen. Perhaps you're distantly related.

you know, gms...i actually know what you mean by someone bashing others over the head with 'ITS ATONAL GUYS'!!!!

Its a good point...but could have been worded better.

For those who want to know, the reason i made the title page so fancy and such is because...i composed it in about 45 minutes. I really just wanted to put the tone row i selected to score. NOTE: i did not devise my tone row mathematically or in the way schoenberg would have selected them (inversions and such). I just chose 12 notes in a random order from the piano, and wrote them down...then put together this piece.

thanks for the advice/complaints Zetetic. Will take them into thought next time i compose a piece like this.

Okay, I listened to the piece. VERY well done, you should write a couple more movements though if you plan on having this performed (it's pretty performable by the way, except for a couple of issues). You kept interest motivically and it's fine considering how short is. However, if you plan on writing anything longer using this harmonic language you're going to want to have a little more organization to how you approach things. You can still use a tone row matrix and not be a "total serialist". Schoenberg broke his own rules all the time. I think you'd be really interested in Berg if you haven't already heard some of his works, he's probably the most musical of all of them Second Viennese guys. I like how you used Ab as a basic tonal center, that helped in your organization, but really, especially if you're new to this type of language, just "randomly" doing things isn't going to take you anywhere or add any sort of interest to your music. I like what you do contrapuntally though.

As for your issues..

1) m. 7 in the right hand, just put that C# into the left hand. The leap from the chord to the B and then down a 7th is just going to be too much at this tempo

2) Leaps are fine usually with the piano, but at this tempo some of the things you wrote seem kind of awkward. Like the F-Bb in mm.2-3. There are actually a lot of skips in here that seem awkward, which tells me you probably wrote this all on the computer and not at the piano. Oh the dangers of Finale/Sibelius. Generally you don't want leaps farther than a 9th, 10ths are okay but pushing it. F-Bb....eh. If you aren't a pianist or are nervous about your playing abilities it's cool. Piano's a hard instrument to write for.

Another piece I would recommend studying is Copland's Piano Variations. Oh yeah, and 2 things by Schoenberg, "Three Piano Pieces" Op. 11, and "Suite for Piano" Op. 25. Seriously, get these pieces, Glenn Gould recorded them and study the scores if you can get them.

Originally Posted by Zetetic

gms5287 is being far too harsh. I don't think it 'comes off' like that particularly.

It's called tough love

Originally Posted by gms5287

Okay, I listened to the piece. VERY well done, you should write a couple more movements though if you plan on having this performed (it's pretty performable by the way, except for a couple of issues). You kept interest motivically and it's fine considering how short is. However, if you plan on writing anything longer using this harmonic language you're going to want to have a little more organization to how you approach things. You can still use a tone row matrix and not be a "total serialist". Schoenberg broke his own rules all the time. I think you'd be really interested in Berg if you haven't already heard some of his works, he's probably the most musical of all of them Second Viennese guys. I like how you used Ab as a basic tonal center, that helped in your organization, but really, especially if you're new to this type of language, just "randomly" doing things isn't going to take you anywhere or add any sort of interest to your music. I like what you do contrapuntally though.

As for your issues..

1) m. 7 in the right hand, just put that C# into the left hand. The leap from the chord to the B and then down a 7th is just going to be too much at this tempo

2) Leaps are fine usually with the piano, but at this tempo some of the things you wrote seem kind of awkward. Like the F-Bb in mm.2-3. There are actually a lot of skips in here that seem awkward, which tells me you probably wrote this all on the computer and not at the piano. Oh the dangers of Finale/Sibelius. Generally you don't want leaps farther than a 9th, 10ths are okay but pushing it. F-Bb....eh. If you aren't a pianist or are nervous about your playing abilities it's cool. Piano's a hard instrument to write for.

Another piece I would recommend studying is Copland's Piano Variations. Oh yeah, and 2 things by Schoenberg, "Three Piano Pieces" Op. 11, and "Suite for Piano" Op. 25. Seriously, get these pieces, Glenn Gould recorded them and study the scores if you can get them.



It's called tough love

Thanks for the wonderful Advice
You are right, I did compose this on Finale and didnt even refer to my piano. I really just wanted to see what could be done in an hour, and whether it would be effective, but I know what you mean with 'the dangers of finale and sibelius'.

'A bit of Useless Information you dont need' - I really want the piano in the same room as the computer. I get VERY impatient with writing on manuscript...this is something I really should get over though. Manuscript is good because you are writing as you make it up on the piano. I just think more harmonically and structurally on Finale, because I can see it in notation form, hear it, and steer away from chords I IV V and VI.

I will fix up those errors too Thanks again.

Nick

Originally Posted by goodridge_winners

Thanks for the wonderful Advice
You are right, I did compose this on Finale and didnt even refer to my piano. I really just wanted to see what could be done in an hour, and whether it would be effective, but I know what you mean with 'the dangers of finale and sibelius'.

'A bit of Useless Information you dont need' - I really want the piano in the same room as the computer. I get VERY impatient with writing on manuscript...this is something I really should get over though. Manuscript is good because you are writing as you make it up on the piano. I just think more harmonically and structurally on Finale, because I can see it in notation form, hear it, and steer away from chords I IV V and VI.

I will fix up those errors too Thanks again.

Nick

Then get better the piano