All Activity

I transcribed many scores, so far, but wanted to share this one. I tend to do these to increase my level of understanding of how some of my favorite composers write their music. I'm certain it isn't 1-to-1 original, since this was done simply by ear, listening and trying to write in all the parts that I could physically hear in the audio... I take no credit for the composition itself, only for the ear transcription written out for it. The piece is owned by Microsoft Studios, and composed by Kazuma Jinnouchi. Original Track Audio Referenced, Here. Light is Green.pdf LIG.mp3 How close did I get? :)

I was also looking into this yesterday, contemplating what I could do to extend the transitionary period, and make it more fluid... 🤔 So glad I caught that myself before I knew anyone mentioned it 😅

The initial improvisation was sent via private DM and is not published. However, as you could see, MK has linked his own reference for the inspiration, just above this comment.

Hi Luis, For me the most successful part of this orchestration is your highly effective brass writing, especially in Bars 19-22. Overall it reminds me of "5 Orchestral Pieces" Op.16 by Schoenberg. I like the piano version too: I find it atmospheric and relaxing. Surprisingly mellow compared to the orchestral version!

Hello! For anyone wondering, this is the little video I sent him. It is not the original improv I did, however, a visual aid to help with seeing chords and simply for fun: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vOLvUgbz4eGiWmd8e35tuUoJ3TkpUdR0/view?usp=sharing Red99, I will make my own comments later/ soon!

@Luis Hernández Yes I know Chopin's piano concerto's well. Some immense moments those particularly in the minor!

I think transitional periods are very interesting. This is the case with the galant style, which is firmly rooted in Baroque conventions but where dense counterpoint begins to give way to clearer melodies and accompaniment. Something similar happens between the Classical and early Romantic periods. I’m listening to your recommendation of Kraus, whom I wasn’t familiar with (Symphony in C minor), and it’s fantastic. I think the choice of instruments in your symphony is spot on. It depends on whether the approach is more chamber-music-like, as seems to be the case here, where there are many independent lines. As if it were an expanded quartet… It’s true that as soon as you move on a little in the style, chronologically speaking, you already come across flutes, oboes, bassoons and horns in pairs. Besides, if you don’t know what to do with so many instruments, you’re bound to get it only half right. This reminds me, albeit in a different context, of the fantastic versions of Chopin’s two piano concertos with a string quartet or quintet. Although it seems that Chopin himself used this arrangement for the music salons of the time, there are versions arranged by other composers. What I mean is that some pieces lend themselves to different approaches. Others do not lend themselves to interpretations that stray too far from their original spirit. Like when Wagner reorchestrated Bellini’s Norma in a ‘massive’ style, and then disowned his own version (it’s never performed; Bellini requires lightness, not a Wagnerian orchestra). Anyway, I’m getting off topic. Best regards

Thanks, Luis. I am definitely being pulled towards early romanticism, and I am glad this is apparent. In recent years I have begun to listen to more Beethoven (generally early Beethoven, though) and his contemporaries (Like Reis, Anton Eberl). But I have also become increasingly influenced by the Sturm und Drang tradition. As such,Kraus Is one current influence, particularly his c minor symphony that Haydn, after hearing, declared Kraus a genius. Sudden dramatic shifts are a hallmark of this style; the intention is often to keep the audience on edge, unsure what is coming next - despite remaining in the 'confines' of common practice. At least in historically informed performance today, top orchestras utilize stacatissimo technique in the strings (especially in the bass) during such moments in the minor that generates a kind of "badass" or "rogue" vibe that conveys an immense attitude that quite often overwhelms my own senses. If you listen to the Kraus, you will hear this effect in the climatic opening from around the 3 minute mark. There is also some late Mozart. I first thought it was derived from Beethoven's slow movement from symphony 1 but is in fact Mozart's Prague symphony (compare the passage from bar 29 of his slow movement with 51 of mine). It essentially serves a modulatory function. Quite often these influences are subconscious and I find only later where they came from. Borrowing should be acceptable provided it is aligned with my own motivic development (hence my own unique spin rather than verbatim that might otherwise be out of place). You have found a weakness of mine. Orchestration is not a skill I have cultivated nearly as much as counterpoint & voice leading. This is why I tend to write chamber music only. Writing this work is intentionally out of my comfort zone. There is brass in this work but is used sparingly. And the woodwind pairings is something I should explore. The main thing is that the voice leading is outlined; the rest should largely be a doubling exercise. I will have to do some studies into this, however. The winds, brass and percussion is the default muse library (the base subscription package). The strings are the 'spitfire' package that cost me around £40.

Hello It’s a beautiful ballad that stands out for its delicacy. It’s true that some accompaniment patterns are repeated quite often. Particularly the quarter-note chords in a steady rhythm. Yes, I know that when this happens, many people say: ‘Ah, look what Chopin does in Prelude No. 28, No. 4’. That’s true, but in that piece – apart from the fact that it’s very short – those steady-rhythm chords are the essence, because the charm lies in the voice leading within the same chord. There are many ways to explore changing that. You could even try moving the melody to the left hand and the chords on top…

An interesting question. I’m not going to add anything substantially new to what has already been said. What would happen if a generation of children were exposed only to contemporary music, completely ignoring tonal music? We’ll never know. The point is that we cannot ignore tonal-functional music. For two reasons: 1) Historical. It is impossible to understand how Impressionism, late Romanticism and Schoenberg emerged. 2) Some musical languages are closer to the traditional (Impressionism?), but they will always be based on concepts from earlier music. Furthermore, since the 20th century, there has been an enormous explosion of styles. Many composers developed their own musical languages (Bartók, Messiaen, Cage, etc., etc....). I believe that delving into each one requires that solid foundation. The same applies to understanding and using extended harmonies, harmonies in fourths or seconds, clusters, mirror composition and a thousand other things....

I’ve listened to the current version. I must say I loved it. And I’ll make a little confession. I like all musical styles and periods, from early music to contemporary. I have my favourite periods (the Baroque and Galant periods, late Romanticism, Impressionism and Expressionism, and in contemporary music, some things I like and others less so). The truth is that when I took the time to study music a little chronologically, I discovered how things develop. I say this because the Classical period is one of the ones that appeals to me the least. I think it’s down to the aesthetic they use, which is somewhat restrained – and well, we all know what this style is like. Your symphony seems to be in the Classical style, with hints of early Romanticism. It’s not that I’m obsessed with categorising things, but it helps to find points of reference. Regardless of that, when someone writes something like this with creativity, inspiration and a lot of hard work behind it, I love it, whatever it sounds like. Here I notice that the orchestra is of an early style; the woodwinds aren’t even in pairs and there are no brass instruments. But the way it sounds, it isn’t really necessary, to be honest. One of the things I’ve really liked is the clarity with which all the instruments sound when they have to stand out against, at times, a denser texture. There’s a moment when the bassoon takes the lead and it’s brilliant (bar 58). There are some lovely moments of counterpoint, such as the woodwinds from bar 20 or thereabouts. I think the score has been very carefully put together. What’s more, the music library sounds brilliant (is it the one from MuseScore?). Best regards.

You can go with what feels right to you at the end of the say. Though for leanring, I would say that traditional tonality is easier to learn and master and it generally sounds more "right" to the classically trained ear. You can start with them to gain more confidence in your musical writing and techniques before moving into more complex ones. I myself started with traditional harmony before going into more ambitious, unqiue and experimental ones. My principal is simple, make every note and harmony count, and use them for a good reasons - and not experiment just for the sake of it. Though again, this is just me.

Hello, thank you for listening. I agree with what you say on these two points: 1) that a piece of music is worth more or less (to each person) depending on whether it ‘speaks’ to them. It’s just like when you read a poem. I understand that many people feel comfortable listening to and making more traditional music. And one of the ‘mistakes’ I often notice is trying to apply patterns, structures or whatever from pre-20th-century music to music that aims to have a different, contemporary style. And I’m not just referring to dissonance, which for me isn’t really dissonance at all. It’s a question of tension and release, achieved through many different mechanisms. 2) Of course, from experience I know that there’s nothing random about making music of this kind. Or at least that’s the intention. The form isn’t traditional either. I’ve always liked writing music of this kind in a mosaic format, or as units or blocks that follow one another as one sees fit (as Stravinsky or Cage did). I’ll probably revise this in due course. Not necessarily to make it longer, but to refine certain transitions.

As with starting anything else, go with a mix of practicals, theory and general exposure. Listen more, learn more... On a technical level, learning how to notate via simple apps like Musescore and the fundamentals of music composition (like harmony, melody and form); on an informational and contextual level, learn about the history and styles of music of different composers; on a musical level listen more a find comspoers and genres you like). From a foundaion you have built, if you have a strong urge to expressyourself through music and compose music, I would say, just do it. It does not and never will be, perfect (especially when you are bstarting with it, as with anything else). The first step is the most importnt. Because it gives you a sense of how much you actually like composing music (how much you are willing to sacrifice and go for, for composing music). You can start with simpler piece/pieces you are more/most familiar with, so that you would likely feel more motivated to push through finishing/starting your own piece. Once you realize you like it, you can explore, experiment, edit and compose more. Along the way, you will learn more and your preferences and styles will evovle - and that is ok and natural. All the best!

Hi, UncleRed99. This forum often seems so advanced that I hesitate to comment on others' work, but I saw your Chatbox and decided to take this opportunity to leave a comment. Please keep in mind, I'm just a beginner. Feedback/Impression: First, I tried to look for the video by MK_Piano, which was your source of inspiration, but I couldn't figure out which one it was. As a result, I wasn't able to check how you developed it, though I was very interested. In my honest opinion, while I did feel several transitions and the descriptive scenery based on them just as you intended, the piece felt a bit redundant. Assuming that redundancy wasn't the concept of this work, I felt that adding more dynamics to the left-hand chords could help improve it. The new section starting from 4:16 is wonderful. To me, it felt like a temporary relief and liberation. When I first heard this part, I imagined strings playing in my head :) I didn't have any particular complaints about the part from 4:16 onwards, but as I mentioned earlier, the sections leading up to it felt a bit redundant. I felt this especially during the section starting around 0:30. Also, for the transition starting at 1:52, I thought it might be nice to halve the number of times the left-hand chords are played, or reduce them even more, to make the texture sparser and create a more melancholic atmosphere, and then burst into the open atmosphere at 2:33 all at once. The transition starting from 3:22 felt so abrupt that it seemed a bit disconnected from the concept. I couldn't think of a concrete solution, but I believe a smoother transition would suit it better. The overall atmosphere of this piece is lovely and good. P.S. I'm sorry if these advices aren't very useful, but I hope they help even just a little. By the way, I would love it if you could tell me what plugins you used. Thank you. Best, Lithl.

Yeah, that's the idea and one of the possible changes! However, in this version you changed the melody at the cadence right before. In this new version the melody at the end of the previous section soars higher than in the original one. I think, if you play the melody an octave higher, it is better to keep the melody prior to that in the same range as in the original version, since, otherwise, it breaks the novelty of the higher rang. You could also keep this new melodic ascend at the cadence and that might add some contrast for the entrance of the original melody you had in G5. Also, I think in both versions, one of the main issues is that the Cmin accompaniment chords are too loud. I would make those chords much softer and, in general make that whole section softer than the previous one (both melody and accompaniment, but specially the later). Thiis dynamic change could also help quite a lot.

Very nicely done! The romanesca bass never stops giving! What is the software that you use? PS, watch out for the voice leading in a few places. I spotted an instance of parallel fifths between the bass and Viola, but otherwise you have done an excellent job. May I ask what your inspiration is when you compose such music… what do you set out to achieve?

Hi Luis, To those familiar with my work - and indeed myself - the words, "free, non-functional, chromatic style" might be thought to ring disaster to my ears. Although this is not quite true. I am particularly fond of Ligeti's work (his Six Bagatelles for winds), for example, as well as some early work by Arvo Pärt (see his Pro et Contra). Even madness has its place in my world of listening. For me, what matters most is producing something of character in a way that somehow embodies the human experience in a convincing narrative. I felt you did this quite well, actually. I recognize that the decisions behind the atonal approach, while seemingly devoid of foundational theory, can be intentional rather than a mere free for all. You should develop it more. Will keep a look out ☺️

Just retuning this. I incorporated your suggestions (attached). This was a huge help, actually. I haven't paid much attention to the presentation of my scores - at least during draft stage - but I now recognize that it is a kind thing to do when sharing our work with others whatever stage of the process. It was also a valuable lesson for me exploring how to do this properly in MuseScore (some functions I have never used). As part of the formatting I halved the note values and time signature of the introduction to align better with the tempo marking. I will definitely be exploring ways to make the closing of the exposition more interesting as I feel aspects of this are somewhat formulaic/uninspired; and I will also shake the recapitulation up. PS - I also make some minor improvements to the voice leading in several areas since the original upload. Thanks again, MASON!

@UncleRed99 OK, thanks – that’s an understandable reaction.

Honestly, on a personal opinion, I don't find this style rather enjoyable to listen to, however, I will say, it reminds me of the old Tom & Jerry, Looney Toons / WB Cartoon play along tracks that would interact with the characters on screen as the show played 😅 Anyway... There are moments where my ear is enjoying the music, while there are many other moments where I wonder what the point of the development is, what purpose the dissonance serves, and what story is being told by the composition... I find myself lost while listening to this, and unfortunately, not in the best way, I'm afraid. However, moments of harmony that are done very well, for example, would be the opening chord, just to name one. Those sort of textures, when put in the right places, are very lovely :) - Unc

Hello A few years ago, whilst on a course I took on ‘Contemporary Composition Techniques’, I wrote a short piece for piano which I later revised and titled ‘One more try’. Recently, I had the idea of orchestrating it. It is written in a free, non-functional, chromatic style. The score isn’t condensed because the instruments that come in pairs often have very different or distant lines. It’s in concert pitch. Below is a video of the piano version. One more try orch.pdf One more try 2.mp3 One more try 2.pdf

Yup 😂🥲

I think his name is actually Mason..🤣

If I limit myself to works not written by me, one of my favorite orchestral works on this forum is this: Here is also a "classic" favorite of mine by @gmm :