All Activity

On second thought, I'd rather not share how I wrote this. I'm afraid of becoming flamed again, or bullied. Maybe on the flipside?

Here it is with transcription errors corrected. Perhaps I should move the Trumpet 1 part into the Oboe to solve the range problem? Or I could shift that passage down an octave, and leave it in the trumpets? Debussy - Les soirs illuminés par l'ardeur du charbon #22 (midi).mp3 Debussy - Les soirs illuminés par l'ardeur du charbon #24 (score).pdf

@Luis Hernández I also own Cecil book. His humor is rather intelligent. But at the time it was written, the alto flute was inaptly named bass flute. now, we both there is actual bass flute. So this is not correct naming. unlike Adler, he miss places other woods in brass section section. Again this is error on his part.

Why does Humanity use CARS ?...........................Why don't they use their LEGS ?

@Kvothe @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu THANK YOU I’m going to try and get hold of a copy of Adler’s treatise… I have a lesser-known little book by Cecil Forsyth (‘Orchestration’) which is a good complement because it covers the history of each instrument, why and how they came to be as they are, amongst other things. As for counterpoint… it’s a controversial topic and warrants a separate thread. In any case, when you haven’t followed a formal musical education and career path, as is my case – I do everything out of passion – at certain points or moments a good teacher is essential. Someone who’s a good educator, who can guide you directly. That gives you the wings to carry on on your own. I’ve turned to this professional ‘help’ at critical moments: When I decided to study tonal and modal harmony in depth. When I decided to delve into 20th-century compositional techniques. When I decided to understand and apply counterpoint in any style. And right now… with orchestration. Long live music!!

I don’t think innovation has to go hand in hand with formal training. I do think that any kind of training is beneficial. What I find challenging at the moment is the very act of innovating. And that’s not a bad thing. There’s enough material and musical languages out there to do millions of things. Throughout the 20th century, I believe there have indeed been many movements and composers who have explored, innovated and pushed boundaries, many of whom have left behind their own musical languages. Ives + Cowell, Schoenberg, Bartók, Messiaen, Cage, Ligeti, … right up to Pärt and Rautavaara. Minimalism… But since the latter part of the 20th century, I don’t think there has been any significant innovation. Perhaps in this day and age, innovation will have to come hand in hand with new technologies and sciences: Symbiosis with artificial intelligence: perhaps the composer could train a musical language model using their own works to generate variations with which to engage in real-time dialogue. The creation of mutable works (soundtracks, etc.) that never sound the same twice, adapting to factors relating to the listener. Perhaps some kind of microtonal system might re-emerge in the future?

= Music Criticism (Innovation) = In recent years, not only in music but in art in general, it has become possible for people without formal training to create works, unlike before. As a result, the world is flooded with a vast number of works. Among these works, there are some that are innovative and groundbreaking. That raises a question I keep coming back to: where's the line between "innovative" and "just bad"? For example, there may be novel instrumentation. This can be seen as innovative, or it can be seen as a sign of a lack of formal training. If that person did not have formal training, would that innovation automatically turn the work into a bad one? While that possibility exists, it also depends heavily on the artist and the context, and could be seen as missing the point of looking at the work itself. This gets even more complicated in an era where a single plugin and a handful of preset algorithms can generate something that sounds "novel" with almost no effort. If anyone can produce unconventional sounds at the push of a button, what kind of innovation actually deserves praise? What do you think? Please share your opinions freely!

Having read the review of the trumpet in F, I think it refers to a natural trumpet. It’s the same as with the French horn. Before the 19th century, these instruments were not chromatic. They were only capable of playing a natural scale. That is why there were horns in D, G, etc., depending on how they were constructed. This entailed significant limitations, particularly from today’s perspective. And that is why they took longer to be incorporated into the symphonic repertoire. In the 19th century, horns and trumpets evolved to incorporate the modern mechanisms of valves, etc., and became as we know them today. I believe that in such situations, one should look for another instrument where the register is comfortable.

I did find this webpage on F trumpets: Robb Stewart Brass InstrumentsOrchestral F Trumpet History — Robb Stewart Brass Instrum...Apparently they were very popular in the 1800s; but it says they're basically extinct today!

Last night, I discovered the magic of Suno's user-designed models feature. Basically, what you do is upload several tracks of your own creation, and this teaches Suno to cater to your tastes and mimic your style. Using this feature has, for me, tremendously improved my satisfaction with Suno and the quality of the site's output. Please do give the following tracks created with this feature a listen:

Now that I think about it, I used to march in a drum and bugle corps and all of our instruments were in G, even though such horns were usually also very rare. I marched with a G Mellophone which was basically a G Marching French Horn. The Trumpets were called G Sopranos and the Trombones and Tubas were just called G Tenors and G Contras. So I'm sure there exists every kind of instrument and tuning imaginable, somewhere.

My bad! 😁

There is no such thing as an F Trumpet! LoL .. There's Bb Trumpet, Eb Cornet, C Trumpet, etc. But if you want a lower, F version of a trumpet you'd probably want a Flugelhorn! Although, I just looked it up on google and it says that F Trumpets and Flugelhorns do exist but are very rare.

Thanks Henry! It's actually by Debussy; not Fauré. (I think Luis mentioned Fauré because their music is of the same era, and has some common traits.) I'd probably have to use an F trumpet rather than a B flat trumpet or cornet? Not an expert in trumpets though! Alex

I actually like the undoubled sound since it reinforces the airy and ethereal mood of the original Faure piece. I think if there’s a bar’s rest it will be better for putting the mutes on. But yeah, using flautando or natural/artificial harmonics can produce that ethereal effect. Will a cornet serve better than trumpet for its more mellow sound? Thx for sharing! Henry

Listen to Freedom's Everlasting Hegemony for String Sextet by 신성음악 on #SoundCloud https://on.soundcloud.com/GQsV2lOAVqKTEFpFeS

Adler’s book does deal with the orchestration itself in a rather detailed fashion. But again, the main focus should be you listening to many orchestral music with the book beside for your assistance on understanding orchestration. Adler’s book does have a quite big list of music references which I did go through and listening all of them really helps me! Henry

I think counterpoint is essential but it can only be learned only after you have some level of understanding on harmony. Fux’s book is great if you want to learn about counterpoint in Palestrina’s style since Fux aimed at the stile antico counterpoint. I would suggest if you want to learn counterpoint, you should get yourself familiar to the Well Tempered Clavier. And theory books on counterpoint are only supplements to real music for you to understand the beauty of counterpoint in real music, Henry

@Luis Hernández Fux is starting point for counterpoint. For tonal 18th century counterpoint: I would recommend: Piston and Kennan and either 18th century counterpoint by Gauldin or Baroque Counterpoint by Schubert.

Many thanks Luis! My idea for the double-bass drone was to have an almost imperceptible note of menace in the background. That's why it's undoubled and pianissimo. It's supposed to represent the backdrop of World War I, since this piece was written in 1917. I think strings can apply the sordino device pretty quickly; but if not, they could always use flautando technique instead (as I have in the double-basses). Noticed this evening I've made an embarrassing transcription mistake at one point: so I will be correcting that later today! Thanks again for listening, Alex

Video Unavailable :/

Hi! I am also writing an essay about to understand music.

TampaBay.mp3So.. I am currently working on a second submission for another call for scores (2/2 now. Submitted one for another competition last week). I would appreciate some feedback on the current progress of this score as it is. I'm looking for answers for: Voice leading; have I been effective with creating smooth transitions between the chords, and leading tones into the different sections? If not, where could I improve this? Form; is the form, starting points & destinations easily distinguishable, enjoyable to follow and effective in the narration of the depicted theme? How could I better write for texture, at and beyond the C rehearsal marking? The score is a tribute and homage to the lives lost during the allied offensive in Germany, kicking off on D-Day in June of 1944. You'll see my call-back to Taps, in a variable manner, near the end of my current stopping point. Enjoy listening & reading along, and I look forward to the feedback I may receive :) TampaBay.pdf

A while ago, I uploaded my orchestration of Schönberg’s Six Little Pieces for Piano, Op. 19. There were lots of things that could have been improved. Mainly because, at the time, I didn’t really know how to analyse the original composition properly and transpose it for the orchestra. I’m uploading only No. 2 from Op. 19 here, which is very, very short. After completing it, it was reviewed by a professional composer, and I’ve noted down the suggestions he gave me. The opening was very ‘dry’, with just the strings in pizzicato, so I added the flute notes, which are in a soft register and played pianissimo, to create a resonant effect. The line played by the oboe and clarinet in bars 2 and 3 – I’d originally written it doubled by a violin, with the parts shared between these instruments. I’ve removed the violin and split the line into two pairs that make sense given the different intervals. This way, the instruments sound ‘pure’, in keeping with this musical language. At the climactic moments, in bar 6 and the finale, I have added a beat or more, so that those climactic chords resonate for as long as necessary. Furthermore, the two final notes on the clarinets were short (eighth notes) and, as the teacher pointed out, the upper part of the chord did indeed sound ‘muted’ and hollow. So I lengthened them. Extending the final chord allowed me to make the harp’s glissando rise and then fall. Before, it only went up. In this sort of language, I think you have to be quite literal, but also allow yourself some licence so that the orchestra can display its capabilities, such as those resonances and prolongations in certain bars. 02 sch.mp3 Partitura_.pdf

My dear friend @Kvothe Thank you very much for taking the time to look at it so closely! And yes, I can certainly see why you would describe it as having a sonatina character. What I am actually trying to do with these pieces is to use binary form as a framework, while at the same time incorporating some of the dramatic principles of Classical sonata form into it. So although the structure remains essentially binary, I try to give the B section a more developmental and dramatic function, rather than treating it simply as the second half of a binary form. In that sense, I agree that “sonatina” can be a more precise description than simply “binary”. The binary structure is the foundation, but I am trying to bring the dramatic logic of Classical sonata form into that framework. My strongest influences are Mozart, Schubert, Beethoven and Scarlatti. Schumann and Brahms have also influenced me at times, although perhaps less directly. I actually haven’t listened to that much Clementi, despite the connection you noticed. Thank you again for your observations. It is really interesting for me to see how someone else perceives the formal and dramatic structure of the piece.