All Activity

so yeah. I do improvise

I am also in a jazz band.

Is this homework? Or just self-study? Hopefully not the former lol Assuming you're studying both voice-leading and harmony, there are a lot of problems, but the foundations are there! All of your chords have all the chord tones present, which is a great start and, for the most part, you correctly identified your non-chord tones. Measure 1: a. Get in the habit of putting serif lines on all of your major Roman numerals. Most teachers will mark you down if they just see a v because they can't tell if it's major or minor. b. No retrogressions: in the first measure, your V (dominant) chord goes to ii˚6 (predominant), which isn't allowed. I've attached a chord chart for you. c. @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu is right. Leading tones in the outer voices must resolve up to the tonic in the next chord. d. This bar has five beats in it, despite the 4/4 meter. e. And, yes, Henry's also right that your neighbor tone creates a parallel fifth against the alto. Measure 2: a. Your first V6 chord's tenor moves down to the seventh (F) as a passing tone, and sevenths must ALWAYS resolve down, so it should go to E-flat in the next chord, which it doesn't. b. Same issue with leading tones in the outer voices, but this time in the bass. The B-natural should move up to C, which fixes the issue @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu mentioned about avoiding 6/4 chords unless they're serving one of the four functions he mentioned. c. The tenor is only three beats long. Measure 3: a. Bit of a large leap from G to C in the soprano, but this isn't a huge deal. Technically doesn't break any rules, except we want to see it resolve in the opposite direction of the leap. b. The first 6/4 chord here isn't passing, neighboring, pedal, or cadential. If your 6/4 chord requires a leap either in or out, chances are it's not correct, unless it's cadential. c. The second 6/4 chord here is technically passing, but wrong to be coming out of another 6/4 chord. d. No minor v's (yes, minor v's exist, but students are taught to avoid them). If you did make the B-flat a B-natural, you still have a problem because the alto has to leap by an augmented or diminished interval, which is not allowed. Measure 4: a. I think you're misunderstanding what a plagal cadence is: the piece should still end on i, but approached by iv, not ending on iv. Plagal cadences aren't really a thing anyways... long story, but they're more often extensions to previous cadences. I would stick to HCs, PACs, and IACs, unless you're explicitly trying to work with plagal motion. b. End on a root-position chord, not a 6/4. c. The last two beats of this bar have too big of a space between the tenor and alto. Voices should be no more than an octave apart from each other, except for the bass relative to the tenor. There's a reason why students HATE learning this stuff, because it feels arbitrary, and it is. Useful in some cases, for sure, but very arbitrary. You should be proud that you're trying to learn a very niche and difficult thing. Keep at it!

https://youtu.be/7S0fxQVLeA0

psh, easy, just laboriously enter each single note from the score for 17 hours j/k 😛

@Thatguy v2.0 Thank you!😁 I tried converting the time signature to 4/4, but sadly there are triplets in the midi I downloaded, so converting the time signature would make them spread across two measures, which is impossible, so musecore didnt let me. I will! And thank you for your comment :]

Hey cool! You should keep making videos, you have an entertaining personality 🙂 This is a great thing you're doing, and hopefully you've learned more about orchestration in the process. I would make sure your score is set up properly, just off the cuff I noticed you have this in 3/4. Just change the time sig. to 4/4 or common time, that way you can really see and learn from the masterful syncopation in this. Nice work, share your future videos here!

Hi @Kian, Welcome to the forum! On the exercise, there’s a parallel 5th in b.1 for alto and tenor. The B natural in b.2 bass should go up to C instead of downward to G. Also be careful of the usage of second inversion chords. Mainly the 6 4 chords are for cadential, passing or neighbouring, but except the V 64 chords are for in b.3 all the other second inversion chords aren’t used properly, esp. the end! At least in SaTB setting the cadence would end on a second inversion chords! Thx for joining us! Henry

Please check the correctness of the harmony in the image and are the functions and cadence correct? Is there an error? Can we call the cadence plagal? If there is a problem with this harmony, please write🫡

Don't think I would've attempted to orchestrate (or-castrate) this sonata; but looks like you had fun with it! I'd love to hear this with the piano part muted.

Haven't heard your previous two canons; but I like this one! My only suggestion would be to add some slurs and dynamics to your instrumental parts, as currently there are none.

I declare my intent to participate in the competition

Scotland actually, and it's Nessie! 🤪😂

I forget if I have shared this before, but I am sharing it whatsoever since Preisner music in Kieślowski's films is probably one of the best all time, esp. comparing to many bleak boring bombard film music...

Cool! Actually, had forgotten for a while that I posted this thread and did repost the quartet in a thread that got some views...in 38 years, and about five attempts, my closest thing to a string quartet! The bowings, dynamics, and expression markings are in the paper manuscript. This was written in a garage smoking a pipe, with a cd box set of Mozart quartets and the score at hand. I can see why some might not like the sudden transitions, but I guess I just wanted that first movement to be peripatetic. The work could be considered overscored! I'm not revising it 16 years later. I don't mind if the quad chords are rolled and rough! Posted in the other thread for this piece: I have a kind of personal "program" for the first and second movements, that I came up with long after the quartet was written! The first movement is a conversation between me and Dmitri Shostakovich, with Beethoven and Brahms politely listening, and Antonin Dvorak keeps bursting in the door drunk, whistling his latest theme! The second movement, Courante and Fugue, is even funnier: the Courante sounds to me like the barrel organ is out of tune at the carnival, and the fugue sounds as if Beethoven, whilst sketching out a fugal section in his late quartets, was even drunker than usual...

Alright, more bass movement in ambience, and bass timbre. Right, so work on the bass. I can do that. Yes, I was personally asked to tone the music down a bit. hahaha

My Brotha, Henry A very talented 16yo you must have been, in writing this work. There were so many musical ideas I couldn't accomplish/think of at that age, since I still remember trying to write my sonata in the style of Mozart. Perhaps, this will be inspiration for me to revisit and revise a few of my old melodies. As for your work, the main melody is quite memorable, and I especially enjoyed the F major variation of it. My only main concern is the incomplete fugue; I think the subject you have has a lot of potential, do consider extending it into a fully fledged fugal variation, I'm sure it will sound superb! Another thing I've noticed in this work is that it showcases quite a few modern touches, including the quick switch between neopolitan and dominant harmonies + occasional pentatonicism.

I messed up my FL studio and now it shows every song in 6/8 even though I usually use 4/4 and when I try to change it I press accept and it does nothing. It's simple. but annoying. if you know how to fix this, please tell me how in the replies

Very cool arrangement! Do you happen to have the score? Something's a bit subpar in terms of sound, not sure if it's the brass? I think the strings sound pretty nice and the tutti sections sound very nice as well, but at the very beginning it sounded a bit, yeah, subpar in comparison. Perhaps the passages with less instruments are to blame as they are "more revealling". In any case and since I do not know your background or your past works, what are these new things you tried? Are they related more to sound production? Or they're orchestration techniques you learnt? Just out of curiosity. Kind regards, Daniel.

Just when I posted this ⬇️ I've come to read about the substance use/abuse rule. I thereby accept my punishment, m'lord. 🗿

Not sure if it serves, but the thing that probably made me not feel that much uneasy was that there was a constant bass sound that I even perceive as comfortable at times. Maybe some more movement in the bass, subtle but noticeable, would help. Or even some absence of bass at times or a shift in its timbre.. At the end of the day, these are your and only your choices. Maybe this is VERY uncanny for some other listener, who knows (I certainly do not). Kind regards!

Hi Churchcantor, or Robert, however you prefer 😁. It seems that this post went through in silence. Let's fix that. I listened to the first movement. While I enjoy the repetition of some ryhtmic patterns, I think it's too contrasting in terms of material (or it appears so at first) and not very well-founded structurally. At the same time it sounds plain: not a single dynamic marking (maybe I missed some?), almost constant tutti except from some sections where all in a sudden virtuoso-fast passages appear and also a pizz. ending that does not convince me at all. But I just could be wrong, I listened to it twice and more often than not pieces require a bit more to be appreciated, specially if they're ones like you submitted. Some other times I just don't like them, though. It's perhaps harmonically daring or inconsistent in that regard too: a more in-depth analysis would reveal one or the other, or both, since practically everything is valid this days and I'm sure you could justify many of the things I may have heard as "wrong" or "weird" or "misplaced", etc. At the end of the day, almost all that matters is that you yourself feel that the work is decent enough. Several years have passed since 2009 so if you are not fully convinced now, maybe these points I brought here are worth noting (and maybe at this point, you know the majority): • Even if you didn't change a note, a better balance of the dynamics of each instrument would greatly help. • The sudden contrasting sections do not reinforce the stability/coherence of the movement, in my humble opinion they rather weaken it. M17 & M18 appearing in the middle of the syncopated section, so dense and all on a sudden, is one example of such a contrasting section. In my opinion, even if you want an abrupt transition, I think it could be stated better (again via dynamics, but also via articulation or even slight rhythm changes, there are many ways to accomplish this better) both in the "before" measures and in the "after" measures. • I can see the movement can be technically demanding at times too. Quadruple stops... Assuming these ones in the score are doable specifically, are you completely sure you need them to be quadruple? After all, it's not a solo, maybe you can distribute the voices in order to avoid these maybe problematic stops. I won't comment much on the score per se, since I am well aware of the poor layout results noteflight default usually delivers. Not to mention the default midi sounds it uses. Wish you could upload a better audio here, it would be neat... I'm myself not a fan of it, but perhaps porting your sheet music to Musescore 4 is not a bad idea. It's 7 AM here and I really need to sleep, but I am eager to listen to the rest of your work...! Thank you for submitting it here and once again, I am sorry the post got a bit lost. Usually posts with material to be analysed are replied sooner or later... Kind regards, Daniel.