All Activity

Hi! Just assessing Henry here, I guess. @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu note that accordionists overall, specially those who are amateur, or just interested in performing, will know as much as any non-player (but musician) of the ways this instrument may be properly engraved. More often than not, as it happens with many other instruments, we "convert" the information to our format on the go. I fear something similar would happen to the piece you've brought to my attention. Now, in regards of the accordion scoring of this PDF I'd say that : RH specified at the beginning of the piece do not match with the provided sounds (LH could, but I'm not certain, it sounds like a Soft Bass and it definitely has no soprano voice sounding in those very first bars that I'm discussing right after this bullet) MMM or MM for the RH are the ones you're looking for, at least judging by the soundfont which appears to be a french musette, so it's either that or open violin register. Note that no registers work for providing thirds neither accordionist spawn them on the go. I'm seeing the working score and I just don't get why there are so many notes that are just not present. Note that not all accordions have these, some 3-voice Piginis and other famous italian concerto accordion brands prefer the dry sound of the harmonium register, LMH. or 4' + 8' + 16'. Your sound is 8'+8' or 8'+8'+8', assuming it's the one you are seeking for. Chord movements by semitones are to be avoided if possible. Otherwise, you'll be inflicting tremendous pain to the accordionist, assuming Stradella system since it's the one you're using. So, without extending myself much, let's just review some examples. These are M15 to M18 if I'm not mistaken. RH register, according to the audio, should be MMM or MM as I mentioned. Bass voice doesn't sound like Soft Tenor but that's minor. What's not minor is that F#dim and Bdim are so far away from each other and from the G7 and C buttons, demanding unneeded agility. Here there's no other option than to briefly discuss voicing. The voicing on standard 6-row stradella accordions with 2 rows of basses and 4 rows of chords is root+m3+7dim (and depending on the register, that can be doubled or tripled in octaves above and below). There's no fifth sound, neither in the 7 button chord, allowing the accordionist to essentially do a Xm6 or a Xº by using the dim button and the proper bass, and some other interesting combinations. And thus, all these red notes are... Not quite accurate, to say the least. According to the register you are using in the score (soft tenor), chords should be an octave higher with the proper voicings. No chord button alone produces more than 3 notes. M/m -> 1-M/m3-5, and for the other two (7, d), you take the 5th. You can find more information about Stradella voicings here in case you be interested in making it right. I have briefly talked about this for a reason, since you're not doing the complete Xº tetrad, the symmetry of chords marked "d" is in principle broken. But since I don't think it's gonna be a problem because the F# is already being played by another instrument, in that excerpt I would change F#º by Cº, which is very close to the G an C chords you're gonna play afterwards, and also, on a similar fashion and by using a similar argument, I would change Bº → Fº. Note that similar occurences happen throghout the whole piece. Finally, there are many register changes that are not reflected in the audio at all. In fact, since the very beginning it's clear that there's no "Clarinet M" sounding, but a French musette. While I can understand the limitations because most usual accordion soundfonts come with musette or in two voices already, there are plenty of incorrect examples. Here I tried to point out some. M26-28. The "Master" register uses 5 voices in the bass buttons, 5 because the contralto doubles the alto voice in half of the octave and the tenor voice in the other half, adding to the previous Soprano (2') + Alto (4') + Tenor (8') + Basso (16'). The website I shared notes C to F in alto and F# to B in tenor, but truth be told, this depends 100% on the manufacturer. On the right hand we got a fair deal of strange stuff too. You write "Musette Imitation", which consists on 2 middle voices (8'+8', one lightly detuned forward, usually) and a voice that's an octave higher. And that's for all notes, not jut for the ones you'd like to double, sorry. What's usually the benefit of changing registers that much in a piece? Little, unless you are Gianfelice Fugazza and you know exactly, and I mean exactly what you're doing, in the context of a pedagogic piece, an étude, an example, or a concerto piece. So I can assure you that with no loss of sound quality or musicality, had you removed all RH register changes and replaced them by an open violin (8'+8') and/or a musette (8'+8'+8') register, the sound would be closer to what the audio depicts and probably to what you were seeking for, since: Accordion, yes! Any accordion? Nein! A French musette accordion, a Cavagnolo, a Mengascini. Not a dry Pigini and if you wanna be just right about the french sound, not even a Hohner would do the trick. Ah, and these are often traditionally button accordions, not keyboard accordions, but you'll find a handful of them too. By doing what I suggested, you'll get rid of difficult/uncomfortable sections. Apart from the chord issues, we'd clean up things like these: Not impossible at all. But if you don't have one of these expensive accordions (that won't sound like French musette) that come with chin switches, you'd better pray these three registers are close enough. And just in case, the other hand is busy handling the bellows. And again, your working score (which I assume you used for the audio) doesn't correctly notate the passage according to the registers of choice. That said, the piece was nice to listen to. Not my turn to evaluate it, and I don't really want to bore you further, but the "Engraving" and "Playability" parts (which are definitely related in my opinion... Something may be possible to perform but its actual playability could be demeaned by its poor engraving) would not get a pass from me, sorry Wieland. I mean: your score frontpage looks very nice, it's original, and imo shows great care for it (though, why does it say 15 of 24 if this is the XXI? Or I'm in the wrong?). So, what happened here? Why none of that permeated into the score itself? Lack of time? Perhaps indolence? Lack of inertia or eagerness cause many may not make use of it for judging? I'm sorry if I'm being hard, but I'm not ill intentioned at all here, I just do not understand. I may not agree with every engraving choice you made in your XXI Praeludium for piano solo but that shows how you could have got a way cleaner score out of this. Or maybe not? If you don't mind, Weiland: what software are you using? Musescore 4? I think this reply is long enough already. I wish you the best for this competition. May you find any of this of help. Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

Hi Wieland, Finally able to reply after some business with school/ life. Not here to do whole reply addressing all of the comments you made, but I wanted to say thank you for leaving one and the nice words you left within them. To your comment on score engraving, sizes, and more, there is a reason for all of it. Here is my list addressing them: 1. Hairpins. In classical literature, it is common to see hairpins from a composer without the outer dynamics specified. The practical implication is that the hairpin is to be executed within the bounds of the provided dynamic. I.E. if you start at a piano marking, followed by a crescendo and decrescendo hairpin, you are meant to crescendo (possibly to mezzo piano or mezzo forte) and back down to a piano dynamic. Unless otherwise specified by an ending dynamic, this would be the assumption. Even a young performer knows to get louder, then get softer, around the same of what they started. In my opinion, it is also beneficial for a performer as they can explore the bounds of such an instance. 2. Score Size. The size of the string staves comes from the following: Chamber works are performed without a conductor (most of the time). Both speaking on my own performance experience and my studying, the score for chamber works is the piano part. We read the piano staves of course, but for our role as an accompanist or collaborator, we need the other parts for clarity within the ensemble. It can also act as a reference for the other parts if they need to check something. Thus, why make the other instrument staves smaller? Well, to save space, paper, and ink! We don't want to do 1,000 page turns, nor do we need to read the other parts. Thus, you make them smaller so we can focus on the piano part without any issue. In my score, the other staves are 80% the size of the piano staves. Attached are some IMSLP links ranging from classical to impressionistic chamber works to showcase this point. All of which are from different publishers: L. Beethoven Op.11 - Gassenhauer Trio in Bb-major A. Beach Op.67 - Quintet in F-sharp Minor F. Mendelssohn Op.49 - Trio no.1 in D-minor C. Debussy CD.148 - Violin Sonata 3. Fonts. I never considered your point on older notation style, like Henle, Bärenreiter, or Breitkopf & Härtel. That and how it may help the monotony of clean or "cold" fonts you may see today. I will consider it for the future!

Yes, that would be interesting to find out what he thinks of my „funnyly placed“ register symbols and my bass notation. I think, the accordion is often too underrated, and so the challenge of that competition was a great opportunity to compose a piece for the accordion as well. I’m very glad you noticed noticed and mentioned that. Indeed, since I this year did my first exercises in orchestration for a full orchestra, I have tried to apply those experiences to the “Quintet.” So I didn’t simply take the original piano composition and translate its four-part voice leading literally to—let’s say—a string or woodwind quartet; rather, I tried to distribute the four voices among the instruments in such a way that the melodies and textures flow more seamlessly from one to the next, as is often found in the magnificent orchestrations of Romantic composers. And that’s exactly the reason - considering the ensemble as an „orchestra“ - why I have chosen an orchestral notation rather than one used in chamber music, which has led to the somewhat unusual instrument groups or families (where the brass, plucked string, and string sections consist of only one instrument each, and the percussion/keyboard section includes the accordion and piano); the bracketing of that „groups“ and the connected bar lines between accordion and piano have already been criticized therefore. The idea for the fugato came to me while I was looking for a form or a “model” for the piece. As I described earlier in my introduction to this post, I recalled the prelude from BWV 852, in which Bach apparently faced “the same challenge”—namely, moving from “nothing” to “something”—and therefore combined three different musical ideas: an introduction in a rather improvisational style, a “chorale,” and finally a fugato in which the first two ideas were ultimately developed together. And since I’m a “counterpoint guy,” I always feel comfortable when I can develop melodies in a fugal manner, even though it was difficult this time, as the flow was somewhat interrupted by the passages where the second and third stanzas begin. T So I finally didn’t end the piece with an ever-escalating fugue, but rather recapitulated the introduction, beginning at rehearsal mark F. Thank you very much. Often, you don’t even notice the dissonances yourself anymore once you’ve listened to your own piece dozens (if not hundreds) of times.

No - from what I understand, you should lower individual tracks since lowering the master will not get rid of clipping if individual tracks are clipping.

A fascinating topic. And lovely examples. I’m a huge fan of counterpoint, but I learnt it to use in other styles, and the issue of parallel voices sometimes slips my mind in this Baroque or similar context. I have written a few canons at the octave, but not for four voices. However, I can think of a possible alternative method; I’m going to give it a go...

Melodies Themes Motives Harmony Chords Textures Form Development Structure Time Originality Creativity Score Presentation Instrumentation Orchestration Playability Execution of Given Challenge Taste 7.5 5.5 9 6 9.5 10 8.75 7.5 Avg: 7.96 Very upbeat piece easily reminds me of a summer afternoon. The intro is a beautiful opening in the classical style, very well done. Clear structure and elegantly formed themes make this a very easy piece to follow. The dynamics or audio balancing need a little work because a lot of your melodies (anything in the treble clef) sound muddled due to the lack of proper balancing. My favorite part aside from the opening, is your key changing at around 2:40. This was a very much needed change because most of your harmony was quite tame. Although the key changing was a fun deviation of your piece, modulations within key can sometimes break the monotony, so don't be afraid to temporarily venture out of key every so often.

is there a way to do that? should I just lower the master?

Hi Daniel! I enjoyed this piece - it has a dark, mysterious atmosphere. I'm a simple man, so when I listened to the cascade of notes at 0:35, it gave me a Rimsky-Korsakov - Flight of the Bumblebee vibe, haha. I like the start around 2:15; that is a good change that supplements more movement to this piece. This is well composed. Thanks for sharing! It would be nice if it were played in the dramatic Russian piano playing style with weight technique. Best, Lithl.

Hi @JDevorMusic ! Technically this should be the most complete piece of the competition! The harmony and mood are the most varied, the use of motives very notable and coherent, instruments, like @Fruit hunter noted, are extended to their utmost potential. I like your use of whole tone scale which definitely makes the music sound impressionistic and French. The piece keeps moving forward because of the varying textures when you allow some moments of quieter passages with fewer players. Like @MK_Piano I think the piece less related to the original poem and the competition theme. But this one is subjective as we all have our own interpretations on poems. But the piece stands alone well! Thx for sharing and joining the forum! Henry

Hi fellow @latebeethoven_addict ! This piece has some really nice melody and warm mood. One thing I notice is that within section you do not modulate which make the piece less interesting harmonically. The whole piece is never in minor. Even though the poem itself is beautiful and "positive", you can add more varied harmonic color in the piece. The use of rhythm is varied enough. The passage in b.66 accidentally reminds me of Chopin etude op.25 no.6 lol! The use of high register piano fast notes in b.108 is beautiful and you capture "breeze" there really well! The ending is lovely as well. Thx for sharing! Henry

Hi @Ninja Nolan ! I like the idea of using different movements to present contrast. The opening movement sounds like an introductory chorale to the piece while the last movement sounds like an ending chorale to the piece, much like the structure of a cantata. The centre movement is the main statement of the piece to me and I love the vivacity of the march, it sounds like opera buffa to me. I am expecting that after the Ab major trio the Eb major march will return as in a da capo piece. I think the texture of the piece can be more varied: mostly it is chordal except the march, and even in the march it works in pairs so rhythmically the whole piece sounds less varied. I think you can also add more contrast inside movement 1 and 3 as well, instead of only having the contrast between movements. Also it would be great if there are some coherence of materials between movements, but this point is subjective! Harmonically it's Baroque and more traditional. And for the text, I think the 3rd movement shouldn't be tragic as in your music with the corresponding stanza: And when the evening comes, the caressing breeze That plays in your veils shall be sweet, And the peaceful gazes of the stars Shall smile benevolently upon the lovers.I myself cannot link the tonic G minor with the happiness of the stanza. The 3rd movement sounds more like a contemplative reflection of something sadder than portraying peace and love in the poem. But this point is also personal and subjective! Thx for sharing! I know I am nitpicky in this comment, but I do like the music especially the 2nd movement, thx for joining the competition! Henry

Hi @Wieland Handke ! For the accordion, probably only @Omicronrg9 can talk about the accordion since he's an accordionist (I'm summoning you here Daniel). Btw, the instrumentation of this piece is almost exactly the same with Daniel's group. I think you are using an orchestral mind for this chamber work. There are lots of careful doublings of melodies and countering parts. I think the texture of this piece is the most varied in the entries I have listened to so far! What is your purpose to introduce fugato in this piece? Is it related to the narrative strcuture? Just one thing: I actually do not really like the ' pulse between the passages which I think it will hinder its flow. My favourite passage is section F when the texture and harmony are less complicated, it really gives good contrast with passages before it. I at first don't like too much of the harmony since I think the dissonance is not neccessary, but after my 2nd listening I suddenly find they are necessary to convey the melachony with the usage of accordion, good job on that! Thx for sharing! Henry

Hi @Musicman_3254 ! I quite like the pentatonic language and the ending some very Chinese to me! But like @MK_Piano noted the piece can be more varied in terms instrumentation. More interactions between the instruments can be added and variation of textures with some more polyphony would be good. Now the piece is predominantly homophonic and sometimes heterophonic. Another thing is the change of harmony and keys. The music is mostly in Gb major with pentatonic setting which makes the piece sounds a bit monotomous and not moving forward becauase of lack of conflict and drama and dissonance (disclaimer: I love the key and setting since I exactly use the same setting for my Sextet in Gb major!!!!!). Apart from the harp issue, for the instrumentation I'm not sure the wind player can play the opening notes that long unless they have circular breathing technique. For the harp players playing glissando is a deafult, so in passages like in b.43 you should rather notate "non-arpeggio". For the score presentation, Cello never uses alto clef but you use it right at the beginning and many later passages!. For strings only viola uses alto clef. Cello only uses Bass, Tenor and Treble clef! Also I think Baritone wil prefer bass clef to alto clef. Thx for sharing! Henry

Hi Mason! @MK_Piano (Not Mark lol) This one is a passionate entry, it for sure matches the original poem: passionate love in bright summer. I actually agree with @Fruit hunter that this one is a love song (but ofc a very good one!) No doubt you and @UncleRed99 are great friends as I see many things similar in your music: melodic, moody, simplistic, con moto and affectionate. The chamber writing is interactive with constant interactions between parts. I think there can be more variation in texture such more counterpoint between the strings: they usually move in a more homorhythmically. I think in some moments you can invite countermelodies as well. But that climax at the end is greatly achieved with the homorhythms with good variation to the original A section. Your engraving is so better than mine! One thing I also note is the key scheme of the piece: The piece is mainly in G major and E minor. Since I have listened to a lot of Scarlatti Sonatas lately, I would love to see more modulations and keys invited in the piece for more contrast, even though the contrast between G major and E minor is already quite good. WIth the less varied key scheme many of the harmonic patterns and sequence are more predictable and less surprising which to me makes the love less exciting. I may sound harsh in this review but it's all personal and I do like your work haha. Thx for sharing! Henry

Hi @Fruit hunter ! I really like this piece, again like the last competition piece you write with percussion instruments and portray childhood (to me). This time your instrumentation is more keyboard based and I really like your usage of vibraphones with tone clusters which create a distant and nostalgic mood of the past. To me the slow sections are passages representing the attempt to get into the past memories and the fast sections are those vivid childhood memories. The passage in b.51 is so funny, it's like when the students are playing the school bell rings and the play is somewhat forcefully stopped. (Even though here it's the memory stopped) What I like less is the passage in b.131. I know you want to change the mood of the piece but the instrumentation there reminds more of a religious setting than a nostalgic setting, which sounds a bit out of place to the entire piece. Like Mike some of the passages I need to leave the earphone because of the high frequency and volume, particularly passages after b.162. I think for the mallet issue even if you can change them instantly yourself, it's always more friendly to the percussionist some seconds to change the mallets. Like @Luis Hernández said there's a lot to learn from this piece. Thx for sharing! Henry

Is there someone who can help me to discover avant-garde composers? Please write down avant-garde composers' names as much as you can. Even if they are famous, I might not know them or never dug into their works. So, I'd really appreciate it if you could raise avant-garde composers' names. Any type of avant-garde composer is welcome: Electronic, chamber, musique concrète, etc. Thank you for your contribution. Best, Lithl.

I've been working on a piano sonata, and I'd like for this music to be the second movement. This music is based on a poem by Robert Frost: "The west was getting out of gold, the breath of air had died of cold, when shoeing home across the white, I thought I saw a bird alight. In summer when I passed the place I had to stop and lift my face; a bird with an angelic gift was singing in it sweet and swift. No bird was singing in it now. A single leaf was on a bough, and that was all there was to see in going twice around the tree. From my advantage on a hill I judged that such a crystal chill was only adding frost to snow as gilt to gold that wouldn’t show. A brush had left a crooked stroke of what was either cloud or smoke from north to south across the blue; a piercing little star was through." This poem really spoke to me during a time in my life when I was healing from something. It was a time when I had to be patient, not give up, continue to strive for optimism even when prospects remained dreary. It was a time when I was searching for something that used to be there but wasn't there now. Perhaps it would come again. But in that moment all I could do was keep searching for it, keep working. It was as if I was standing on a hill top on a cold, crisp day, looking out over endless miles of fields, trying to make out a little puff of smoke in the distance. This is music about healing. Healing is not pleasant when it’s actually happening. Sure it feels great once it’s done, but the process itself is slow. It requires intense patience, and often comes with pain. So this music isn’t about being healed, but about healing. I know that sometimes my music comes off as slightly strange, as if it can't decide if it is classical or modern. This piece, with all its searching and reaching, really leans into that. I'd really love to hear your feedback. I greatly value any thoughts you'd like to share. ❤️ (This was performed by Edward Cohen) Thank you! Looking for a Sunset Bird in Winter.mp3 Looking for a Sunset Bird in Winter.pdf

Hello @MK_Piano! The review of your piece is my last one, not because—far from it—it gives me a headache, but because I have great respect for it. This has nothing to do with the piece itself, but rather with you as a person, which I’ll try to explain briefly: First of all, the challenge of the competition - to take Paul Verlaine’s poem “Donc, ce sera par un clair jour d'été,” as the inspiration of the composition, and to try to evoke moods of summer, love and beauty – was your idea, which might perhaps have arisen in your mind for a longer time. So you have a certain advantage over the other participants—or let’s say, a kind of “tailwind.” On the other hand, I’ve already heard a lot about you—your compositions and, perhaps even more importantly, your insightful reviews—and that, combined with my knowledge of your professional background, carries the risk of being biased and expecting you to deliver an outstanding work (even before I’ve heard it at all). Taking all that into consideration, I will give my best not to take that considerations as a „bonus“ or a „malus“, but trying to be as objective as possible in that sense. Melodies Themes Motives and Harmony Chords Textures: The entire piece is based on a simple yet effective motif that could be described as an “arch”. It is introduced by the piano in the opening measures and then repeated by the violin. Furthermore, this motif, repeated twice, forms the melody or theme of the “song” that unfolds after the introduction. The harmonies are „romantic“ and pleasant, dissonances or other „coloring“ is used in a subtle way. We have a variety in texture between the different instruments, while preserving the overall melody, allowing the listener to follow the piece with ease. Form Development Structure Time: The piece starts with an introduction that already „spoilers“ the melody and uses a cadenza as the „curtain opener“ of the song which now unfolds: Its three parts could be recognized as corresponding to the three stanzas of Paul Verlaine’s poem. Each part consisting of „melodic passages“ where the main theme is „sung“ and passages either calming down or developing the harmonic or rhythmic material further. Originality Creativity: The piece does not owe its originality from „experiments“, let’s say a spectacular instrumentation or other effects. It is well crafted, somewhat hiding the compositional details and skills applied behind an overall „solid“ and pleasant impression, and therefore one can recognize it as an original „Mason Kistler“ style piece. Score Presentation: I’ve noticed that you often use hairpins for dynamics without placing dynamic marks at the beginning and end. In my opinion, that’s not a bad thing (though there are some situations where I’d prefer to see a dynamic indication, such as in measure 24 for the violin), but I’ve listened to many orchestration tutorials in which this was considered a “mistake”, and the instructor insisted on explicitly specifying “from where to where” the hairpin increases or decreases the dynamics. Is there a general rule for this? Beside that, I didn’t find things I would consider „engraving issues“ (and I admit that I did not explicitly search for nitpicks). So I would end up with a more general comments on the readability and „aesthetics“ of the score: In my opinion, the font size for the strings parts is too small and make that parts hard to read. I suppose, that you’ve chosen that somewhat aggressive decrease of the font size for the other instruments than the piano to achieve getting three systems on one page (yes, this is sometimes hard – and on the other hand, having only two systems on a page would look ugly). And there is another thing which makes the score somewhat „less enjoyable“ to read – and that has absolutely nothing to do with you and your engraving – since that is an inherent „problem“ of the scores produced by the most nowadays notation software: The result is „correct“ but seems to be „cold and mechanical“ when compared with older hand-engraved scores. There exists an interesting „Essay on automated music engraving“ from the developers of the „Lilypond“ notation software I use, where that issue is discussed in brevity. Instrumentation Orchestration Playability: Your choice of a “traditional” piano quartet is not exotic (as some of the other submissions), but rather solid, and it gives you the opportunity to create enough musical color to highlight the main melody in various variations, ensuring that the piece doesn’t become boring throughout its entire six minutes. I’m sure you’ve examined the playability of some of the more challenging passages (and you’ve already mentioned this), such as the multiple stops in the string parts (especially for the violin at the end). Execution of Given Challenge and Taste: You resisted the temptation to take the competition’s challenge “literally” and set the poem to music to create a kind of “chanson”. Instead, you’ve composed a pleasant piece with a memorable melody that recurs in the piano and violin, conveying the feel of a song with clearly defined verses and transitions. The mood remains cheerful throughout the piece, evoking the image of the sun on a summer day; it changes only slightly in a few passages, as if small, fluffy clouds were obscuring the sun for just a few brief moments. All in all, it’s a “solid” piece, if not the most solid of the entire competition. With this strength, your piece would certainly appeal to a majority of the “general audience”—in contrast to some other, more exotic or atonal submissions. On the other hand, you haven’t stepped outside this kind of “comfort zone”, so for a “more specialized audience”, such as the reviewers on this forum, pieces with their “rough edges” (and perhaps even their shortcomings) might have an equal or even better chance of attracting attention. Melodies Themes Motives Harmony Chords Textures Form Development Structure Time Originality Creativity Score Presentation Instrumentation Orchestration Playability Execution of Given Challenge Taste 10 9.75 10 9.5 9.25 10 9 8.5 Average Score: 9.5

Hello @Kvothe! Interestingly, your entry—which was the very first one submitted to the contest—and the last one feature the same instrumentation: a (piccolo) flute, a viola, and a harp (while @JDevorMusic added two vocal parts). Melodies Themes Motives and Harmony Chords Textures: There is a melody played primarily by the viola and sometimes doubled or contrasted by the piccolo. The harp serves as an accompanying instrument and plays arpeggios—either “slow” ones, explicitly notated in semiquavers, or “fast” ones, notated as arpeggiated chords. With these ingredients, the piece develops a consistent flow that is occasionally interrupted by moments of “pause,” such as in measures 19–24. There are almost no accidentals throughout the entire piece (except in the harp’s arpeggiated chords, for example in measure 23). However, this does not mean that the piece is written in C major (or A minor); rather, its harmony could be described as “pentatonic.” Form Development Structure Time: The piece has no „traditional“ form (such as sonata or rondo form), but develops the above mentioned melody and texture in a „free-flowing form“. And at the end, we have a kind of „fadeout“. Originality Creativity: This piece is unique among all the submissions and therefore creative, evidently due to its pentatonic sound and somewhat surprising instrumentation. Score Presentation: The score presentation is not very appealing to me. Especially the first page, with its large blank space, seems a bit “half-hearted.” I would appreciate it if the font size were larger for better readability, which, on the other hand, would lead to a more effective use of space on the pages. And, as far as I know, a viola part never uses a violin clef – viola players are „monsters“ at reading ledger lines for their higher parts. Instrumentation Orchestration Playability: An instrumentation, consisting of a flute, a viola and a harp should be a useful choice. The flute and viola can interact with each other as melody instruments, yet each has its own register, preventing any overlap. On the other hand, when played pizzicato, the viola can “communicate” with the harp—the most important accompanying instrument. As mentioned already by other reviewers, the particular piccolo flute is somewhat weird, since it is usually not used as solo instrument and has a register that is too high to be a good companion to the viola. Concerning the playability, especially for the harp, I see no issues with using the pedals, since accidentals are used very sparingly and, when present—as in measure 23—are separated by full measures of rest. I’m not sure if a harpist would enjoy playing broken chords in one hand and “fast arpeggios” in the other (as in measures 25–30), and the chords in measures 19, 21, and 23 seem too large to be played with one hand. Execution of Given Challenge and Taste: The piece has a playful character. However, I cannot recognize any (strong) connection to the topic of the contest: To take Paul Verlaine’s poem and create „Something“ in music. The mood of the piece does not necessarily evoke associations with a summer day or the beauty of a couple of lovers, nor does it have a typical “French” character. Rather, it reminds me more at the sound which is played (in an endless loop) in the background of a Chinese restaurant. Melodies Themes Motives Harmony Chords Textures Form Development Structure Time Originality Creativity Score Presentation Instrumentation Orchestration Playability Execution of Given Challenge Taste 7.5 7 6.5 8 6 7 7 7 Average Score: 7.0

Thanks. I used Musescore for the score and formatting. I used Blender to make the background for the cover page.

Hi, many thanks for your review. Great to hear from someone who's actually played the piece! I did try adding more of the trills and mordents initially; but they didn't sound good: so I took them out again. I feel like these are idiomatic for the harpsichord; but don't work so well in an orchestral setting. Especially given the very dense ornamentation of the original score. I can hear some issues with the pitching of the celli and violas around Bars 19-27. Can't seem to get rid of this problem, despite trying several different instrument libraries. Could be a bug within MuseScore, but I'll probably have another go at fixing it.

The reason there are no violins or oboes is that I wanted the brass section to provide the sparkle in this short piece.

Hi I’ve really enjoyed these pieces you’ve mentioned. Video game music and the like is a subgenre that fascinates me, but one I know very little about. I’ve carried on listening to a few more tracks. I think the orchestration is very rich and colourful. It’s true that the brass really stands out. Thank you.

Wagner. Scriabin. These I can say.

This is something I've been wanting to do for a while. The lamento bass is a famous motif based on the simple idea of the descending tetrachord (commonly in d minor). In my realization I build momentum with complexity with which I aim to demonstrate the range of possibilities within this short space. One can keep going with more variations. It is both a beautiful and inexhaustible concept. Prelude for the Soul.mp3 Prelude for the Soul.pdf