All Activity

Hallo @interlect , that is a good question. Honestly, I also never heard about „Counter-Melody“ or „Twin Melody“. However, since I’ve always use counterpoint when composing, possibly I can explain something about. First of all, the “reviewers” who have concluded that this piece is not counterpoint may be somewhat surprised, since the piece has a “jazz” or “big band” feel that one doesn’t necessarily expect when looking forward to a piece performed on an organ, a piano, or perhaps by a chamber orchestra. But that kind of „style“ is not the issue. Counterpoint is not a style of music or related only with a certain era, namely the Baroque time. There is, for example, a Russian composer, Nikolai Kapustin, who wrote always in Jazz „style“, including 24 preludes and fugues in Jazz style, which – of cause – apply counterpoint. So, counterpoint is a composing technique, rather than a style: Counterpoint, or polyphonic music is all about voices that form rhythmically and melodically independent (horizontal) musical lines. When two or more such voices occur in a piece of music, they interact with each other, following certain contrapuntal rules and thus creating harmony. Since all voices are equally carriers of the melodic and rhythmic material, there is no specific melody voice and no subordinate accompaniment, for example through (vertical) chords. While singing independently, the voices do not have to be completely unrelated. Often, one voice repeats or imitates what another voice has sung before, as is the case in a canon, for example. Counterpuntal compositional technique fascinates with its efficiency in the use of thematic material. Once started with the (fugue) subject and the „accompaniment“ in the other voices (which is, in fact, no accompaniment but material being developed in interaction with the subject), there is enough material with which to compose without having to stop and reflect. To come back to your example: To me, it’s inherently a typical jazz piece based on a chord progression over which the band begins to improvise. In a chord progression, the vertical approach—that is, the chords themselves with their harmonies—is the fundamental compositional or improvisational technique. The melodic material follows these harmonies and generates the horizontal lines as a result of them, rather than as their original idea. And even though your two brass sections interact with each other in a kind of melodic dialogue, I get the impression that they are engaged in a “playful competition” to see who can deliver the better improvisation over the underlying jazz harmonies, rather than developing a “subject” or thematic material. There’s nothing wrong with that, and I really liked the piece, but it is also for me no counterpoint, and the other classifications like “Twin melody” or “Counter-Melody” (which, as far as I know, aren’t clearly defined terms) seem to be an attempt to express in a single word what I’ve tried to explain in more detail.

They are, are you talking about arpeggios?

It would be really cool to hear a large string orchestra play this piece. A couple of comments: It's a bit static and on the short side. I think more development of the melodic material, or even an another theme (that's a little more "active") can help with that. There is a lot of unconvincing, but slightly interesting voice leading and harmonic clashes going on. Some of the transitional chords really random and don't set up the next phrase like they should (most prominent example is bars 39-40 going into 41). It would it make more interesting to have the lower strings have a more active part than just holding on to half notes. The violins don't always have to play the melody, share it with the others! Try to be more creative in writing for parts that are accompanying the melody.

I just happened upon his work because it came up in my YouTube feed. He really seems to have been a good composer, and I will be checking into his music. I wouldn't be surprised if I wrote something and was influenced by his technique. Yasushi Akutagawa - Wikipedia Yasushi Akutagawa 芥川也寸志 - Triptyque for String Orchestra (1953) (sheet music)

Hello This piece is fantastic. It sounds very modern in many ways: dissonances, harmonies, dense textures, etc. But it retains a Baroque spirit. Bravo.

I like this, Tristan! As good as anything I can do for piano. You have followed me for long enough to know that I can't even play piano, but are those rapid chromatic glissandos possible? Maybe they are, some special technique; never really looked into it. I write very conservatively for piano.

i dont know i cant read music ?

Never heard of Twinmelody! Henry

Hi ....................Whats the difference between "Counter-point vs TwinMelody" ? The Track below was submitted for a Counterpoint Evaluation, and came back as Negative, stating: not counterpoint. A Double brass Section 1: panned left 2: panned right If its not counterpoint is it classed as a Counter-Melody ? COUNTERPOINT vs TWIN MELODY.mp3

A clip from the final reading session today VID_20260422_220745~3.mp3

Probably more of a visual reminder to bang on that note...might've overdone it with those markings

Hi all, Here's a short work for string trio. All comments welcome. Mark New String Trio.mp3 New String Trio.pdf

Looks Like We Made it | V.I.P. Symphony Orchestra : Rendition A Barry Manilow Symphony Orchestral Arrangement..................Makes me Cry Every time Barry Manilow - Looks like we made it - Rendition.mp3 barry manilow looks like we made it Rendition.pdf

Appreciate it! It is funny because imo, one does not have to be an English major to know how to write or dictate well lol Knowledge can be a great strength when you know how to use it

@danishali903 Thank you for your comments; they are very valuable to me. I will certainly take another look at these orchestral versions and keep your comments in mind. However, in general, I believe that during this period—similar to (though distinct from) Impressionism—the conventions of classical or Romantic orchestration do not apply in the same way. Of course, I already suspected that some very fast passages wouldn’t be idiomatic for certain instruments, and that information is very valuable to me. The same goes for playing fast passages in unison on two instruments. However, some doublings that seem unnecessary are there for the sake of color, which, in some cases, departs from classical combinations. This is what we often see in the 20th century. I have a certain fondness for these orchestrations. Because I really like the original piano versions. But they’ve been through a lot. I made them quite a while ago without having a clue what I was doing. Then, when I wanted to revise them, they went through the process of converting to XML, importing into another program... And there are things that need cleaning up. The most important thing is that when I did this, my beginner’s mistakes were very obvious, and I wanted every instrument to be heard in every piece, no matter how brief the passage—hence all the unnecessary doubling and the inconsistencies in dynamics, with too many instruments playing at pianissimo. But I’ve since learned my lesson, and in this very chamber-music-oriented style, you have to be very economical with your sounds. Well, you’ve encouraged me to make a new version taking your comments into account—thank you.

The six short piano pieces date from 1911 and belong to the free atonal period, preceding a more “radical” systematization.

I was mainly asking, because you sometimes combine sfz or sffz with a vertical accent (e.g. Bar 119).

Hi there, TristanTheTristan, and welcome to the subforum of my nocturne! I am really glad you checked it out, and I would say I would practice that part with hands separated first, and then with different rhythms each. By the end, put them together correctly.

Hello there, @TristanTheTristan! I see you have written a nice nocturne. I really like the style of this piece, although I may have to question the G sharp minor part's start. I believe that might be a bit difficult to understand and play, but I do like the idea. May you please tell me how you would practice that part?

Luigi Boccherii | Minuet : RENDITION + Bonus Track Luigi Boccherii _ Minuet _ RENDITION.mp3 Sympathy for Symphony.mp3Luigi Boccherii _ Minuet _ RENDITION.pdf

You sure you're not an English major too? 😂 I like how you spun that 😆

Three Souls, Each with Natures Divided

Well, whether or not you wrote specific bowings, you still wrote slur markings for the strings, which to them imply bowing information. Whether or not it's explicit, you can always justify your reasoning as the following; "With the given technicality of the work already demanding high accuracy from the performer, I wanted to take today to test if my orchestration would make the bowing information clear and implicit. For today, I decided to give their bowing instructions based on the slur markings in their parts, and following this session, I will amend and update the bowing instructions on the final copy of the score before its first performance." This essentially covers you in case they ask about it

Yes, true...however part of the assignment was to thoroughly mark up the score (that means dynamics, articulations, BOWINGS, etc). We've studied each instrument family in depth to get a sense of the capability of each instrument (what is easy vs hard, how to write idiomatically, what's impossible, etc). We had a whole test on bowings lol

You're welcome! Lol, string players tend to break bowings often to do what's best - depending on the concertmaster too