All Activity

The main thing I struggle with when writing art song, is that the singer has a limited range. I think in art song it is very important to have a harmonic idea of your poems first. Then creating a melody around that. The piano does 90% of the work and the voice should get the credit. As a singer, I truly think the best art song has most phrases within the range of a 5th. From phrase to phrase you can shift this around, but the more rangey it gets, the needlessly difficult it gets. If the poem is contemplative I would hold this as a strong guideline. But if it's angry, or disjunt, maybe not worry so much. This isn't to say that anything will be bad if written this way, but it makes it harder to execute. Also do you have a baritone in mind? Here is a piece that conveys what I think is important: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeXlTfC7MVM Most of the phrases are quite narrow for the voice, this allows the voice to navigate their difficult "passagios" Also notice how as the piece gets more intense, so does the range. And pay attention to how softly the pianist is playing throughout. It should be noted that this is a VERY difficult piece for voice. Specifically the closer you get to the end. Long phrases, short breaths, extensive range, lots of dynamic variety and high soft singing. The only reason its popular is because its so pretty. However the piece is subjected to pretty much only professional singers because of its difficulty. German Lied, is much more text driven. Generally a German Lied cycle has a lot of variety and color changes, as it was expected back then. So often times in a cylcle, piece are exaggerated in their color as much as possible. Sometimes I get annoyed at German lieder for not staying in the moment long enough, in attempt to create variety, but they are the world famous composers and I serve food to people. So getting into tonality. https://youtu.be/gHGYmV0frnw?si=H3MTNlnYh6iqUtvM Previn is always a favorite example of mine. Its tonal, but never the same tone. Listen to how the piano completely shifts from texture to texture in order to convey emotions, and prepares the next phrase. This poem is very complex, but the piano and voice work together to make it fathomable. Previn switches from between three primary textures, wide complex chords, high dissonant/poignant chords, and flourishes. Each represents a specific feeling. I think the wide chords express the "setting" of the poem, the natural feel. These are about 50% of the piece. The high dissonant chords have a feeling disappointment, while the flourishes express child-like hope. Also worth noting, this piece is really hard to sing. He never "preps" the singer with a pitch, making it incredibly difficult to find a pitch, even a augmented 2nd is difficult to find. I'm not big into non-tonal music so I can't help you much in that realm, but I think look at berg: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3I_7OHTr400 He's just my favorite in the not-tonal world. As someone who has sung a few atonal works, and others on the cusp, my main ask is: please make exceptions to your tonal rules, to allow the words to have their impact. Art song exists to create the worlds in which poetry exists. If the poem has to be forced by the singer, it is not a good art song.

I like your piece very much, and I think the formatting is the main thing to make sure you get right when submitting. You have the cover page, all your formatting looks good. I think one more thing to get an edge is to add some program notes notes, and performance notes. If you have anything to say, maybe consider putting it on paper. Maybe consider making the your measures per system more consistent? I think sometimes the computer chooses 3 measures per system when its not really appropriate. Your music looks like it can stick with 5 measures every system. m. 87, you have a crescendo leading to a forte, but with a rest in between, maybe go around and make sure nothing like that is happening. If the rest of the orchestra is crescendo-ing to forte, go ahead and write that in all the parts unless you intend otherwise, and specifically write otherwise. Clarity over concise. The rest of what I have to say is lower priority, get your formatting perfect first. One more thing to consider, only if you have time. You put most of the rhythmic interest in the snare drum. One way you could create some interest, would be add some more short rhythms in some other brass parts. Trumpets love fast tonging, maybe find a place for that. I know you play trumpet. what do you like playing that you haven't done? Also percussionists can play more than one instrument. I understand the mood/style you're inspiring strongly evokes the instruments you've chosen, but at least consider if there is some mid piece changes that would maybe strengthen the piece? (Bass drum?) Also consider giving your players some more breaks, especially before solo-like sections. The horn is hard after playing for 10 minutes straight. A couple more 10 second breaks for horns seems in order. Maybe give some trombones a chance. No VST can recreate the absolute beauty of a trombone solo. Trombones have an easy time with vibrato. Also maybe consider a coda with more extensive V-I action, I was surprised when the piece ended. Don't try to do everything I said, I gave you a bunch of stuff, some of which might be totally against your creative idea. I think you have written a wonderful piece that I believe is warranted for a selection, but I think some of the above things are especially important. Consider your jury, if you don't know who they are, its usually 50% conductor, 25% executive director, and 25% players. I think you can have a director convinced with the idea of your piece, (program notes help with that). Your score is very clear. But I think at the moment, the players are going to feel like the piece is tiresome for horns, and lacks time for trombones to shine, and under utilizes the wide range of a state-level symphony percussion section. Trumpets are going to have a great time. Your piece can still be selected, so don't toss this beautiful work, but these are the possible issues catching my eye.

I wonder if m. 57 would be more effective if you deleted it, and gave the measure before a big rit. Otherwise I just had relaxing time listening.

audio?

Hello I really liked it and it’s a pleasure to listen to. One thing I’m not sure if it’s related to the programme: the ‘natural’ (nat) marking at the start. At first I thought it was going to be a rather ‘boring’ piece, because in a four-bar phrase, having two or three instruments simply marking the harmony makes no sense. But I can see that in the middle section and the development, this changes radically and becomes very interesting. I’d like to make two observations: The first is that, even though these are virtual instruments, I think it would benefit if you were more precise with the dynamics and accents. And the second is that Violin II overlaps with Violin I quite frequently. Generally, this doesn’t seem to be a problem because they’re playing very different parts (one the melody and the other an arpeggio) and the overlap is occasional. But at certain points, such as in bars 23–24, it does become a bit confusing. Best

Hello @SergeOfArniVillage, That is an exciting post and really a „project“ with a bunch of pieces worth to be reviewed! So, first, to get an overview, I have taken a first look at the scores to see how the preludes are organized. Prelude No. 1 (I) – C major (but ends in C sharp!) Prelude No. 2 (II) – A minor Prelude No. 3 (III) – G major or E minor Prelude No. 4 (V) – D major (but ends in E?) Prelude No. 5 (VI) – B minor Prelude No. 6 (VII) – A major Prelude No. 7 (VIII) – F sharp minor (but ends?) Prelude No. 8 (IX) – E major (but ends with five flats?) Prelude No. 9 (XI) – B major Prelude No. 10 (X) – C sharp minor Very interesting, the tonality of the pieces is not as obvious in every case, but I suspect, that the preludes are intended to be all in a different key and organized around the circle of fifth (the same way as Chopin’s 24 preludes or Shostakovich’s 24 preludes and fugues - the roman numbers I inserted above were the numbering according to that scheme) and therefore my first question, do you plan to complete the cycle to all 24 pieces/keys? Now, I’m going to listen the single pieces. Prelude No. 1 Yes, it starts slowly with a C major chord, but immediately asks three consecutive harmonic „questions“. They are developed further until a climax in fortissimo but retain unanswered with a finishing C#m(add9) chord. A great overture which makes curious what will happen next, after the curtain rises. Prelude No. 2 The overture continues! But now there is more movement, as the heavy chords are accompanied by driving sixteenth notes. Prelude No. 3 Although it begins in G major, I am now certain that this is the E minor prelude. And that makes sense, because it provides the first moment of calm in the cycle. With that in mind, I’m certain you should insert another piece (between No. 2 and No. 3) in G major—as a “heroic opening to the opera”—following the first two “introductory” pieces, which have built up tension that now needs to be resolved. Prelude No. 4 Now it gets louder again. The prelude reminds me somewhat at Shostakovich’s prelude No. 6 in B minor from its op. 87. However, you interestingly achieved the feeling of a „French overture“ not by double dotted notes but only by accentuating and phrasing your semiquavers! Just now – after 100 bars - I had the impression that it could become somewhat too repetitive, but you’ve presented the right answer to that feeling with your surprisingly ending of the piece with „staccatissimo strikes“ in mm. 101-103 and unexpected resolving to Em7. Prelude No. 5 As surprising the former prelude ends, the new one starts in its opening six measures. But now starts the fun! (More than) an entire bar in rest, and than we have a ragtime which continues to change into a „free jazz“! I really enjoyed your „walking bass“ whereas I really could imagine a Jazz trio on the stage (with piano, double bass and drums). A fantastic piece, perhaps my favorite from the ten ones. Prelude No. 6 Calming down with the A major prelude with the opening F doublesharp diminished 7th chords. And even more in the Adagio section with its „ethereal mood“. But the calm is deceptive as the drama begins in bar 33 (or even earlier with the first fortissimo in bar 28). Interesting contrasts throughout the entire piece as well as another surprising ending, as the finally reached A major chord is „disturbed“ or „spiced“ by an A sharp! Prelude No. 7 A good companion with the previous one, both share the contrast between „drama“ and „ethereal feeling“, but this one in a somewhat more „pleasant“ way. The combination of bass-heavy chords and pearl-like runs in the higher register lends the piece a certain beauty despite its dissonances. The deceptive „endings“ (in mm. 41) and the rests (in mm. 18-19) arise a sense of tension and curiosity about what will happen next. Prelude No. 8 Now we are back in a realm which I would describe as „Jazz“ (in a wider sense). Thriving rhythms and syncopation paired with complex chords. It somewhat reminds me at the brilliant preludes (and fugues) or concert etudes of Nikolai Kapustin, the famous Jazz-pianist-composer. Haha, and in mm. 53-53 the chords repeated eight times (from ff to fff) remind me at the famous eightfold repeated ninth in the left hand of measure 35 of Bach’s B major Prelude from WTC2 (BWV 892), so that we have even a reference there. Prelude No. 10 I changed the listening order, since in my imagination to follow the circle of fifth as arrangement scheme, we should now come to C sharp minor: Although the prelude features various, contrasting textural means, such as heavy chords, arpeggio runs and triplets, the „harmonic kaleidoscope“ of the previous preludes is now calmed down to a more tonal approach (as I see no accidentals at the ultimate chord, while being towered by a ninth). Prelude No. 9 The cycle (so far) ends with a gentle or tranquil piece with pleasant – and sometimes dissonant – chords, thus finishing the arch to the Prelude No. 1. But the curiosity for more prevails: After the expected ending in B major (over a pedal tone), you could not hesitate to create suspense or tension with the ultimate chord which leads us to the (possibly) next piece in G sharp (minor) ... Final words. It was a fun to take a closer look and to listen at your preludes and I’m very curious if that cycle would be continued – especially as my „project“ (it is somewhat a „life-time project“) is to compose 24 preludes and fugues (fortunately more than the half is already accomplished). My thoughts or „review“ is merely subjective, and I did not analyze the scores thoroughly to „find nitpicks“. The only thing I discovered is that there were some notes I am not able (or willing) to read due to the amount of ledger lines … Great work! Wieland

Hello !......Here's 2 examples that might Inspire. Additive rhythms 1.mp3Additive rhythms 2.mp3

2 Amazing Contemporary Composers. Star Wars- The Imperial March (Darth Vader's Theme) John Williams .rendition by Mavell.mp3 STAR TREK END TITLES Jerry Goldsmith. rendition by Mavell.mp3 Star Wars 1.pdf Star Trek 1.pdf

solo violin

Hi everyone, I’m looking for some advice on how to notate additive, prose-like rhythms. They aren’t typically too complex, but they don’t fit into clean metrical cycles. I’ve been discouraged before from having a time signature change in every bar, out of practical concerns, but I’m not finding a more practical solution. Another tricky part is notating passages where rhythmic cycles might be offset in different instruments. I need a good strategy to ensure ensemble coordination (right now it’s mostly chamber music). One thing I’ve seen in Ligeti’s scores is to have a 4/4 signature as a basic grid, but indicating rhythmic stresses by beaming or accents instead of metrical position. I’ve tried it, but I’ve found it makes my rhythms seem even less intuitive, often with pesky ties across bars. Here’s a rhythmic excerpt, that I’ve included to demonstrate how I’ve currently been notating. It most clearly reflects how I think the rhythms. The omission of the denominator was inspired by scores of Mompou (you may agree with it or not), and the general format was influenced by some additive-based pieces by Arvo Part. Is it possible to keep this solution? Or does it hinder sightreading or ensemble coordination? Thanks in advance for any advice you can offer on the matter. I’d really appreciate it! 01 - Full score - Rhythmic notation sketch.pdf

I'll upload at main text. Really ty.

It's fine I get it. Get it ready soon! 😁

Hello.... I’ve finally managed to listen to the whole piece. I’m not going to make any technical comments or anything like that, as there are people of a much higher calibre who’ve already done so. I’ll just say that I really liked it. I think you have a powerful vision of what modern, chromatic counterpoint can be. Everything fits together perfectly and the piece never gives the slightest hint of being boring. What’s more, it’s a real pleasure to see such a clear score. Well done.

Deleted. Really sorry. Sounds so rough is why I deleted. I Don't know how I can deal DAW well...

@MK_Piano Could you please check the opening when you have time? Thank you!

Have you made it private or deleted it?

Oh yes the Violin concerto is great!

Hello I really liked this piece. It seems to be inspired by Philip Glass’s 20 Preludes. It’s brilliant how the melody in the 6/8 section is ‘hidden’ within the arpeggio yet remains perfectly recognisable. The sound you’ve chosen – a bit muted but with a certain brilliance – is lovely. I’d suggest you try one thing. In the recapitulation of the theme in 6/8 and/or in the final exposition, insert a long pedal note in the lower register (E flat or whatever suits). I think that would add variety to the piece, as well as depth and balance across the register. But as I say, that’s just a personal observation. Best

OK I think this is the best reason for maintaining the key. In other words, doing so with that conscious intention, as in the examples from the repertoire. I use Dorico too, but I’ve been using it ever since version 1 came out. I used to use Finale as well, but I never liked it, so I switched. I now consider myself an ‘expert’ in quite a few areas, though not so much in others because they don’t interest me. The condensing feature is brilliant, but sometimes you drive yourself mad trying to work out why something hasn’t been condensed. The programme still has some bugs in this respect. Best regards.

🇸 🇵 🇴 🇷 🇹 🇾 | 𝗘𝘅𝗲𝗿𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝘅 : 𝟭+𝟯 | How many Press-ups have you done this morning ?..........I lifted a Cup of Coffee !

Thank you all for the feedback! The past couple of days have been busy, so I’m only just getting around to responding. On the choice of key @Luis Hernández I did consider transposing the piece to E minor to make it more comfortable for the musicians. Ultimately, I decided against it because I think the key contributes to the harmonic “color”—something that becomes even more significant in orchestration. Speaking from a string player’s perspective, the reduced resonance from open strings and the frequent need for vibrato help reinforce the piece’s somber, melancholic mood. There are also contrasting sections that modulate to more string-friendly keys, such as G major. In those passages, I use open strings and natural harmonics to make the contrast more pronounced. @Alex Weidmann , speaking as a semi-professional string player, I’d say it’s definitely playable. That said, it’s an uncommon orchestral key and creates plenty of intonation challenges for the ensemble. I can also confirm from experience that orchestral players generally aren’t too thrilled when they see a key signature with five or more flats or sharps! Orchestration choices Thank you for the detailed feedback, @Luis Hernández I agree that I may have written the English horn parts a little too high in places. Honestly, if I’d had the option, I might have scored the piece for two English horn players, since the instrument’s tone and timbre fit the atmosphere so well. Strangely, I’ve never been especially fond of writing two oboe parts—but maybe that’s just me. You’re probably right about bars 52–53. My intention was to thin out the upper octaves so that the viola-and-cello octave line would come through more clearly, with the upper voices adding a kind of “shine” to it. In a live performance, I think it could work reasonably well, depending on the strength of the flute players. I’ve been using Dorico since Finale went bust. I used its automatic condensing feature for this score, but I’m not always happy with the choices it makes. I usually go back and manually condense or uncondense the parts, but I didn’t have time to do that for this piece.

Oh, no not at all. I believe I use them well, within good context of the phrasing. If you have a different opinion of it, based on the score I have in this post (Which I am about to update after publishing this reply), I'd be happy to hear it. Any level of feedback is a chance to improve for the future :)

@Wieland Handke I feel noticed. 😁 And nah-nah-nah-booo-booo he listed me fiiiiirrsst 😝

Hi everyone, This is my latest piano composition that I wrote. I'm very happy with how it turned out. Hope you enjoy listening!

Avey Tare & Panda Bear - Alvin Row ignore the first 2 minutes of this song