All Activity

@maestrowick Thank you for the specific feedback. I'm not surprised with your comment on the C-section; I thought the same thing, and I added or subtracted a quarter-note here or there to help it along, but I do understand that's fairly subtle at the listed tempo, and its repetitive structure does lead it towards sounding like those variations are inadequate when it comes to keeping it interesting. I haven't thought about the rest of the content of your comment prior to my posting, but I feel like there's some really helpful information in there. I am relatively new to writing orchestration after all. I'll keep posting and implement whatever I can!

Hey! You can just write "Tuba." Tuba transpositions don't work the as other instruments. Bb, F, C, Eb tubas all read the same part. This instrumentation is different. Perhaps consider adding the French horn so you would have standard instrumentation with a tuba. Also, the tuba can do way more. Since you have it here, think about adding more rhythmic variety with the tuba (especially in the counterpoint section)/ You could give the tuba part to the clarinet, and then write a virtuosic part there. My 0.02/

In general, you have some great ideas. I wonder at the end, perhaps the trumpet should play the opening theme in major to connect the end. Same with French horns. It would connect the ending with the beginning more.

Amazing notes! Any I thought saying , you already posted!

Yes, the choir goes DIRECTLY above the orchestra and below everything else. That is just standard practice. Also, it s true, I critique the score. As for the phrase markings, assume nothing. In classical music, they initially won't play it legato. Also remember, they probably won't have but only one rehearsal to rehearse this. Finally, yes, I am big on score markings/notation. It's how the performers internalize what the composer truly wanted. I've learned the hard way to take nothing for granted when typesetting!

Not sure what you're referring to, the choir is evidently above the orchestra both in the score I first provided and the one I last uploaded before you made your comment. Perhaps you meant the choir parts should be placed between the string orchestra and the woodwinds? Again, not sure where you're getting this from. It doesn't take a full woodwind section of geniuses to figure out the general character of the piece based on the articulation of the string entries preceding them and play their own expected articulations in accordance. Which enharmonic notation ends up in the final part scores will be completely dependent on the contours and intervals of the main theme according to the requirements of the resulting key per each entry/transposition so as to avoid said cognitive dissonance allegedly present in the current version of the score. The latter, as the main score including all parts, is not meant to serve as a dedicated particella for each individual performer, but merely as a general visualization of the flow of counterpoint across all entries and transpositions. I could, but the mezzosopranos can reach that B natural just fine. Despite the voice crossing, which is to be expected in settings with this many voices, swapping their melodies in that specific spot, or any other for that matter, would most likely completely sacrifice the melodic contour in either case, not to mention putting the whole structural integrity of the coda into jeopardy. In my view, the detriments of changing it far outweigh the benefits, so it will stay as it currently is. Thank you for clarifying. It would have been exceedingly hard to tell otherwise unless you had included any technical commentary of note about the music itself instead of focusing exclusively on notation nitpicks pertaining to the scoring alone. Have a wonderful day.

This is wonderful (and I'm not just saying that because I love the piece 😆). I think you've retained the character of the original piece, without making it sound muddy or too heavy. Your doublings and overall orchestration choices seem calculated and well thought out. I think the few notation issues are an easy fix, and would make the score more readable. Good job 👏🏾

Greetings all! I present here my latest orchestration of Rachmaninoff's beautiful and haunting Prelude in B minor. It's a rough score (as usual), with lots of slurs yet to be added, and flute division that needs sorting. Some of the notational issues come from the original piano midi I used as my source. E.g. The places where I have two crotchet triplets followed by a minim sextuplet. (Obviously four triplets would be preferable.) Also the strange tempo change to 80 bpm, and time signature change to 5/4. I will fix these; though it's going to take a lot of work, as I don't think there's an easy way to do batch conversion of tuplets in MuseScore. (Unless someone knows different?) The big bombastic chords in the piano original were quite awkward to deal with; but I realised I didn't need to match the piano rhythms exactly. All I really needed were pulsing chords of some kind: so that's what I've tried to create. I haven't been able to find any other orchestrations of this piece: so mine may be the first? Anyway hope you enjoy. rachmaninoff-prelude-in-b-minor-op-32-no-10 (orchestration) #47.mp3 rachmaninoff-prelude-in-b-minor-op-32-no-10 (orchestration) #47.pdf

Thanks for taking the time to listen and for the feedback! I think you made some fair points that I'll definitely keep in mind for future pieces. Since this was my first attempt at writing in a larger form, I tried to keep things relatively simple while I focused on the structure. Might write a second movement for it eventually. Thanks again for valuable feedback @TristanTheTristan

HanselandGretel_unfin2.mp3 HanselandGretel_unfin2.pdf

Hello again, I decided to spend some time today to give more specific feedback. In this PDF are some annotations for you: H. Zheng - Dawn and Nightfall [ANNOTATED].pdf

A friend of mine requested that I write something with a tuba part, so I wrote something centered around the tuba. A link to the score: https://musescore.com/user/118018538/scores/35329313 A Joke for Tubists.mp3

Hello MinGry! I see that you have written a nice little piece, that i wouldn't describe as a sonatine. This is because a sonatine is Usually multi-movements Not ternary form, but instead Sonata-Allegro form, which has three distinct themes in the exposition, which goes from I-V (usually and you did that well) and also usually repeats. Then comes the development and reprise which you did well. You have a nice first theme, that actually seems to plain. The whole piece is basically just a mezzo-piano. You might have been able to develop the textures better by using more dynamics, and using more staccato maybe. You could have also had more layers of complexity. Good job on exploring a new style as a composer! Keep improving! Tristanthetristan

Fun rhythms, and I love the motif of the cello. The recording is beautiful and the cello is especially very expressive. Cakewalk though...that's definitely a blast from the past!

This is my first sonatina! and my first exploration of a larger musical form. I learned a lot while writing it and am looking for any kind of feedback and overall impressions! YouTube link Hope you find some enjoyment in listening. Sonatina in C Major.mp3 Sonatina in C Major.pdf

Thanks for taking the time to give it a listen! I definitely agree that it's a lot of different ideas from day to day haha trust me the other 20 days are even more random! Overall I think it was good for me to do this kind of thing, it did force me to get into a habit of composing more!

for around 5 to 6 months

Well, thank you. 😊😇😊 Many have heard my music. To answer your first question, it was a mixed bag: some say it was their "most favorite" of all student compositions, while others said "don't give it to an orchestra". (Flattery much? Ha. 😏) In a three-judge panel at my university's blind Spring Competition for Composers, the first threw a.... kind of.... thoughtless textbook criticism at me, one which I've heard countless of times being used on composers. It does loosely align with your own sentiment, only worded less positively (almost sounding as an insult dressed up as constructive criticism; backhanded constructive criticism, if I may): that my music was a "plethora of ideas that didn't develop". He felt that my music was "meandering without a sense of direction"; that my "future focus" can be on "where the music goes and why". (I don't think you yourself had mentioned anything about lacking direction and development overall; just that my flight-like move from one point to the next made it hard for you to really know what the motifs were; but was overall a joy to listen to. Correct me if I'm wrong, which I can be, but I'm guessing that you at least realize some decent sense of direction and why it went that way, correct?) What irritated me about this judge is that he completely distegarded just how much effort I had spent developing and honing the very items he says my music lacks (direction and development); dismissing it as if it was another sadly-advertised unseasoned student piece. He had three weeks and a half to look at 5 scores; the other four of which are not nearly as long and nearly as hard as mine. (Believe me: we student colleagues share our music during comp seminar. I saw the files they uploaded the hours before the deadline!) And, the best thing he could come up with is "plethora of ideas that was 'meandering' and 'didn't develop'." (Thanks much for actually taking time to assess my music?) But then, the second judge from this competition was on the complete opposite end of the opinion spectrum: she "absolutely loved" the "unique and innovative" techniques in my score that "haven't been devised before." Her companion compliments focused on my use of harmonic progression; and how everything invoked a massive mythical imagery. She was only concerned about the way I deployed irregular rests in my 5/4 measures: that it could produce a lot of visual "clogging" in the individual part scores. (She wouldn't have known that, in the part scores, the irregular distribution of 5/4 rests was only on those first measures of exposure; any proceeding measures in that same musical period were given multi-measured rests; as I trust my performers got the beat down, after seeing the first measure of said-irregulsr rests.) Above these, she was very intrigued and eager to learn what the programmatic narrative was. (There was no word from the third judge; which I found suspicious. He/she may have "disliked" my music so much, the potentially aggressive comment in it could not have been forwarded to me by the composition chair; who told me that the third did not respond. Why wouldnt a judge response?... This is what I predict had happened to my third comment.) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I think, over all, one main common consensus among (almost) everyone who had commented so far had zoned in on the "moving too quickly from one idea to next". (And, again, wofn it's a stream of consciousness type of composition, that's one element that should be anticipated.) After that, it's all up to individual biases. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ All that aside, in regards to your second point (which addressing it was enmeshed into my addressing thr first: You didn't answer my questions regarding the definine motives that I stated were the Tone Poem; nor did you answer my question about Stravinsky's "Rite". 😁

Hello everyone! I come to you with my first piece produced on my new Acer laptop that runs Musescore smoothly! I have taken the opportunity (before I always had a school chromebook so I couldn't do this) to download Cakewalk Sonar DAW which allows me to open all my old .wrk project files from back when I was using Cakewalk Home Studio over a decade ago. So, if you can't tell by the title, this is one of my juvenilia that I dug up from way back when I used to compose into the sequencer. Back from around 2008. I intended it to be a mix of styles between classical and jazz, hence the corny title 🤣. I use blues scales, extended harmony, altered chords and polychords - all in a way that is intended to be "classically jazzy". I hope you enjoy this piano trio and let me know what you think! Thanks for listening! Jazzical Piano Trio.mp3 Jazzical Piano Trio.pdf

Wow ty for the critique. Yeah I should definitely look into the silencing part.

Welcome to the forum! Let be one of the first to say hello and congratulate you on this endeavour. All of us know how hard creating a convincing and satisfying piece of music can be, let alone an original one! You are off to a great start, one of which not all adults can do. I enjoyed listening to your piece. This said, I do have initial comments and a deeper set of specific annotations I would like to share later. Here are my initial comments: The ensemble balance is too similar for too long. Violin 1 & 2 dominate the piece, and the other strings just act as support versus having a convincing conversation/ role in the piece. Use of whole notes is more than okay. If you like it, then keep them! This said, having a lack of pulse in the texture can make the music feel stagnant. Some of the other comments you have received may have been coming from this angle. To add, since the violins dominate the music over the course of 4 minutes, it makes the listener "zone out" as nothing major changed to their ear. Do not forget about slurs! As a string player, remind yourself that the use of a slur conveys bowing information. Even if you are not as aware as the other bowing styles, using slurs is a great way to showcase bowing information. The context of the music will inform them whether to up-bow or down-bow. Creating motion. To help the "stagnant" nature of the piece, one way to create motion is this: When the melody is slow, move the accompaniment. When the melody is moving, slow the accompaniment. Doing this will help drive the piece forward in a simple manner. Using rests for effect! While Barber's Adagio for strings is wonderful, remind yourself that even in such a thick and lush piece of music, he used silence for effect. Not all instruments need to play at the same time, nor do they always need to play in the same octave. You have the whole string section to move and pass ideas around. Strings can do double stops and divisi playing. It's another way to create an effect as using silence will elevate the moments you use all the sounds or all the instruments. Keep up the good work!

I decided to not waste my life and compose something*. Sibelius crashed so I used musescore. This song is meant to sound not evil or phonk. I spent around idk like maybe 30-40 hours on this piece in total? I tried to use some "counterpoint" but since I am not good at music theory I have no idea whether I did it correctly. I used caesura's 3 times in total. Again I don't know if that's correct or not. Also, some voice crossings are in there, but I couldn't find it. I honestly have no clue how polished the piece is, it's one of my first 10 pieces. I started it in like 8th grade and finished it this summer (going into 9th grade) in case anyone decides to comment on how dogwater my skills are. Also, first time using tremolo in any piece. I play violin well, CM'd like 2 years so I'm PRETTY sure the violin portion is playable and well, but I have 0 clue about the other parts because I don't play any of the other string instruments. Most of the song is in the last part.... another issue probobly That said, well, I would like some feedback. ESPECIALLY in these spots: 1. Middle section, I don't know why I wrote it but, is it fitting? It's slow and not very "elaborate" and also it's placed weirdly IMO cause it's like supposed to be in the middle, but it's also not really centered. the part after it is MUCH more than the first portion. It's like centered but not centered but also centered but technically not centered but also IG kind of centered, but like it's not really centered. 2. Whole notes. I know like barber do it often especially in adagio but a bunch of people I saw in like online threads saying like that whole notes are generally not good? IDK I personally don't mind it too much but yeah. 3. counterpoint, I feel like I messed it up bad, but then I don't know how to improve it 4. dynamics. I know there is MASSIVE room for improvement because, yeah, it's really bad Structure. I never studied structure before, so I have no idea what is what. I TRIED to use like ABA but the second A portion is very off balanced. So the structure is trash and could use much improvement Thank you for your critique in advance, and thank you for your time. *I'm composing because I broke my nvidia rtx 5090 and now I can't play games at 1000 fps so I quit entirely dawn-and-nightfall.mp3 Dawn-and-nightfall.pdf

Thank you very much for your in depth a detailed review!

Hello It sounds brilliant to me. A good balance of textures, not always crammed full of all the vocals – I like that. The organ sound is a bit odd because of the attack-release or whatever, but then again, it’s such a massive instrument that it’s spot on. Well done.

Hello The important thing: a massive piece of work... Very interesting, it really draws me in, and it’s very well presented; the sound is brilliant. I must admit that variations aren’t really my favourite genre, but then again, when there’s quality, there’s quality. One thing I particularly liked is that, although some of the variations are very short, the transitions between them are, on the whole, very well executed. That gives it continuity, within the nature of the genre: variation. I’ll just mention a couple of things: One is a matter of personal taste: all those fast sections – vivace, presto, prestissimo, etc. – tire me out a bit. But as I say, that’s subjective. And another thing – this I do find a bit odd. Bars 20 and 24 in the first variation… My ears and brain weren’t prepared for that. Mind you, I’m no stranger to dissonance, but it has to be in context. Those extremely strong minor second dissonances – there aren’t any more powerful ones in the entire consonant tonal environment – sound like a mistake. If they’d been set up, if they were repeated… but like this, so suddenly and in isolation… You could have used other, more subtle dissonances here and there… Yes, we sometimes think that in music ‘anything goes’, but well, in moderation. Later on there are sections that include dissonances, but they’re well contextualised. Congratulations on your work.