Leaderboard

It's been a long time! I used to frequent this forum in my 20s, now I'm 42 years old, living abroad, haven't really written any music in the last decade, but I never fully gave up on writing music. It's time to fix my writer's block. I'm setting up this topic as a challenge to myself. Writing music in my 20s was something that came very slowly and painfully as I am a massive perfectionist and not terribly disciplined. So this plan is designed to cure me of that. - Only writing fragments for now. No aiming for completed pieces. - Focusing on practicing use of musical elements I like, experimentation over destination. - Loosely tracking my time in order to force something out the door, rather than get stuck on revisions. - Long term learning goal is to build the skills to write hybrid electronic/orchestral music for games. If anyone wants to take on this challenge with me, feel free, and you are welcome to post things here. For my part, the pacing is starting at one small post per week. As I feel able, I may increase that. Music will be hosted on flat.io and eventually Soundcloud, and linked here by Sunday evening USA-Eastern time, which is Monday morning my time. Feedback is welcomed, but I will be trying to take feedback lightly and focus on quantity of music creation, on volume, rather than refining the quality. First entry: https://flat.io/score/69930d12f4b7f4206442ca2c-sus-slash?sharingKey=4f68cd0e43730c91e48416b8978810ab0c63680a3161fb07fbfcbc75e85c135b02a6f15102ff10978621f147508f16a2ade8791783c86664bb7ed9f0e3b671f9 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14lZ2g_oCxI For this eight-bar melody, I chose the musical element described in the above youtube video - suspended chords above a slash bass note, essentially sparsely voiced tall chords. I wasn't following any particular progression principles, just whatever sounded good, but trying to follow the structure of the chords described in the video. Couldn't quite nail down the last chord, sorry it's unsatisfying, but according to the rules we are moving on!

Hello On this occasion, and to increase my skills with regard to brass instruments, I have orchestrated a song by Mendelssohn, Op. 19 No. 3 (Hunting Song), originally for solo piano. The ensemble consists of four French horns, two trumpets, two trombones, and one tuba. I had to improvise to resolve some passages where the registers were very high, but it is not a literal copy, rather a version with certain liberties taken. I have respected the original key (A major, which is not bad for brass). But another might have been better, such as B flat major (but some notes were too high for me). Everything is untransposed and in separate systems (I am working on condensing it with the programme, but it's a bit of a nightmare...).

Since this is in essence a revised version of my earlier Enharmonic Perpetual Canon No. 3, whose single contrapuntal flaw replicated across all voices required a modification of an octave leap which ultimately ended up necessitating a transposition of the whole canon a perfect fourth higher, I decided to change the title of the entire series thus far to "Pantonal Perpetual Canons", as the previous title didn't quite serve as an accurate descriptor of the technicalities within the compositional process that gave rise to these pieces. Due to the necessary integral transposition of this work, however, the coda's newly resulting ending key (F-sharp/G-flat major), the only key along with its relative D-sharp/E-flat minor that displays an equal number of accidentals when enharmonized, far too many inconsistencies relating to the enharmonization of melodic intervals can be found in this version. Normally I would have managed to transcribe the melodic theme across all its internal transpositions in a way capable of satisfying apparent melodic continuity throughout the notation process, but due to the ambivalent quality of this key when it comes to enharmonization, not even the coda could be perfectly transcribed without far too many double accidentals. As such, as much as it irks me to see it like this, I have had no choice but to leave the currently notated version of this canon as is. The choral lyrics of this canon (once again, in Latin) translate as follows: "Change is inevitable in all things. Everything flows in the balance of those who are tempestive." As for the coda, its own lyrics further drive the meaning of these aphorisms to greater clarity and realization. YouTube video link:

Hello @Luis Hernández! Having just listened to your orchestration in comparison to the original piano work, I must say that the brass orchestration perfectly matches the character of the “Hunting Song.” The piano version is also beautiful, but it doesn't convey the image of a forest where hunters play before or after the hunt as strongly—perhaps this was also because the recording I heard was at a much faster tempo, which would have been uncomfortable for horns, trumpets, and trombones. In the semiquaver runs, the french horns sound somewhat to „soft“ what might not be the case in a live recording (while the trumpets retain their typical brass timbre), but despite such nitpicks concerning the realism of the software reproduction, the entire piece sounds well balanced and there is nothing „rattling“ (that’s what I call it whenever there is something that had to be improved according to the listening impression). A beautiful, authentic orchestration of a classical piece that captivates with its very own character!

A four-part fugue exercise composed on a given subject, with no particular instrumentation in mind. Developing the subject contrapuntally wasn’t difficult, but after a while it became rather monotonous. The labels A1, A2, B1, etc. indicate the various fragments on which the episodes are built. (The slurs are only meant to highlight motifs for my own reference.)

Hallo @Fermata! Your asking about the issue of „monotony“ in your fugue. Sometimes it is not an issue with the composition itself, but rather a question of the interpretation or recording. Since you are using four string instruments „played“ by your notation software, you „naturally“ encounter the problem that the entire piece sounds somewhat monotonous. Even real string instruments blend the sound very well, in my opinion, but are not as expressive for individual voices. I can imagine, when played on a piano, the impression would be totally different. As currently discussed in another thread @PeterthePapercomPoser suggested to improve the recording by “fine-tuning” the articulation, dynamics, and tempo for each individual hand or even voice. I also had a fugue which I considered to be „boring“ and I was nearly to get around and throw it away. But then I applied such tiny adjustments in the tempo, for example to make the first bar of the subject a little bit „swinging“, which dramatically changed the perception. Since I do so now with all of my piano works, I know that it is a lot of work to literally maintain two scores, one for the printout and one for the recording. But it's really worth the effort to achieve a sound that is much closer to a live performance. Concerning the composition „as is“, I think there are no issues. With a short overview on the score I see that you already applied the necessary counterpuntual techniques (such as tonal answer, a recurring countersubject, inversion, augmentation, stretto). As in 6/2 meter with mostly half and quarternotes (perhaps in an older, more Palestrinian style), it would be not appropriate to add passages (in episodes) or countersubjects with a faster rhythm. Perhaps one could introduce a kind of diminution which doesn’t increase the rhythmic pulse by doubling the speed but is merely a rhythmic variant of the original subject preserving the quarternotes as the fastest ones, finally resulting in a 1.5x diminution (such as in Bach’s D# minor fugue from the WTC1 BWV 853).

Very nice dreamy, yet mysterious and passionate prelude! I like the frequent changes of the time signature. While initially looking complicated, the rhythm of the piece has an intuitive pulse and a continuous flow. I noticed, that your score is without a key signature. But since you often change harmony from keys with sharps to keys with flats, this decision avoids that the score is cluttered with natural signs. And when listening and reading the score I like that the more serene passages correspond with the flats, while the more passionate passages feature more sharps! In some bars, I would like to see more octave brackets to make it easier to read when playing. Personally, I refuse to read more than three or four ledger lines. However, I agree, that too many octave brackets disrupt the visual impression of the runs in the score. I completely agree with @PeterthePapercomPoser's suggestions for improving the recording by “fine-tuning” the articulation, dynamics, and tempo for each individual hand or even voice. Since I do this with my piano works, I know that it is a lot of work to literally maintain two scores, one for the printout and one for the recording. But it's really worth the effort to achieve a sound that is much closer to a live performance. Thank you for sharing!

Hello @Alex Weidmann! Nice mysterious Prelude! I'm surprised that @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu hasn't reviewed it yet since it's in his favorite key! 🤣 I have a few technical nit-picks: I've recently changed the way I write for piano through Musescore Studio 4 which I think might benefit you to hear about. If you favor the Musesounds Piano as I now have come to prefer, then in order to have more control over balance between the most important melody notes and less important background chords/figurations, you could actually load up two (or more) separate pianos and change the way they're displayed in the Layout section of the program (by deleting the bass clef portion of the right hand piano and deleting the treble clef portion of the left hand one). Then, not only will you be able to change the balance between the hands in the mixer, but you'll be able to give separate dynamics to each hand - an amount of control which you would lack with just one grand-staff track. Although you'd have to put in pedal marks for both tracks, and hide them in the top track. As well as hiding dynamics that are redundant. But I think bringing out the most important notes in each chord and passage will greatly improve at least my impression of the work. Another thing is the tempo. I noticed that you're trying to create a sense of novelty through the use of unusual rhythms and meters. I think it could be even more effective if you included an ebb and flow to the tempo by simulating a sort of constant rubato with choice accel.'s and rit.'s here and there. I can refer you to examples in my own catalog if you'd like, where such rubato gives a very satisfying result (at least in my opinion) and cases where the piece would suffer greatly from the mechanicality of the rendition if not for the rubato. Some places to consider including an accel. and rit.: bar 30 accel. into 31 I think would be a nice paired with that crescendo you already have. Other than that, nice job! I also question the interruption of the expected 4/4 flow of the beginning melody with the 9/8 measure - I think that's unnecessary. Thanks for sharing!

Hi luderart, I am approaching your music as a performer. If I were sitting at the piano and you handed me this, these are the questions and suggestions I would have: 1) The first thing that stands out to me is the metronome marking. You indicate the quarter note receives the beat at 140 beats per minute. Yet, your starting time signature is 6/8. You need to indicate what the dotted quarter note receives. 2) The writing is pianistic; I can play this and it fits in my hands well. However, adding fingerings, articulations, and music shapes would prove your technical intentions. Example A demonstrates a finger alternation technique. Chopin's Grand Waltz Brillante, Op. 18, is a good example of this technique. Example B tells me to use the same finger on the repeated notes. 3) Measure 14 is slightly confusing because of the way it's presented to me. The time signature is now 9/8 and I have a dotted quarter note on beat 6, not 7. You also have a staccato marking on the dotted quarter note. Did you want it to be short? Example A depicts the music as you've written it, but with a display in accordance with the meter of 9/8. Example B depicts the note on beat 6 as short. I hope my approach finds some consideration with you, Patrick

Hello @Fugax Contrapunctus! I really enjoyed listening to your revised canon, as it sounds very harmonious and has a constant flow that could perhaps go on forever, musically underscoring the lyrics. As reading your introduction, I see how much effort you’ve invested to make the piece what it ultimately is, and that you have dealt with the challenges to finally find a satisfactory enharmonic notation that is both harmonically correct and easy to read, so I have not gone into detail about your score. Surprisingly, although the rhythmic texture consists of only a few motifs that are repeated dozens, if not hundreds, of times as they move through the voices and instruments, it is not boring, but illuminates the theme from so many different angles until it reaches the coda, which initially introduces more tension and finally resolves. In this context, I am reminded of Bach's D major fugue from WTC2, BWV 874, which also repeats its short fugue subject extensively. Now for some thoughts that should be understood not as criticism but as questions I am asking myself: Your canons, especially this one, are magnificent examples of how contrapuntal imitation techniques can be brought to absolute perfection. However, I am not sure whether a cycle of, say, six or twelve such canons would be presentable in a live performance for an audience other than a highly educated one. For such a purpose, I could imagine that the canons should alternate with “less demanding” pieces, such as fugues, chorales, etc. (That could also be the reason why The Art of Fugue contains only two canons, as far as I remember ...)

@interlect I appreciate the comments! I must admit I am a little confused. The work acts a means to capture differents scenes about the ocean. In order, they read as follows: 1. The Shore | Waves Crashing 2. Sailing over the Waves 3. Swimming | Seeing the sea life 4. Getting lost 5. Seeing a whale 6. Travelling to the shore | Sailing 7. Returning to the shore 8. End The competition also has a minimum length requirement and there is not enough time for me to completely overhaul the piece for the chance of creating something so original it will wow older professional musicians. This has already taken 3 months of work over the last year in on and off periods and is meant to be a little programmatic so it can fit other concert cycles. I think it is both a piece fun to play as an ensemble and fun for the audience as there are a lot of things that one can imagine when listening and not have it feel stagnant. My reservations are with the execution as I feel the flutes, harp or certain instruments will get lost in the texture(s).

Hi to all! Have been trying to compose a piece for theorbo, and am finding it really hard! Mainly because of the 8 unfretted strings, that can't be tuned to accidentals. That seems to limit me to the 7 modes of C major; or something bitonal or atonal. Anyhow, I've posted two versions below. The first is what I wanted to write, and the second has been bent out of shape to eliminate accidentals on the lower strings. Am thinking I may have to throw the whole thing out, and start again!

Hello Luis Very Impressed by your Presentation, i presume this is a "Cover" of Mendelssohn. Which means if you can re-create such a Complex piece, then creating your own "Original Composition" will be No Problem at all. Regarding the Production quality, im amazed how Crystal-Clear the treble Range is, i hope to match that pristine sound hopefully one day. In the Meantime i shall be looking out for an Original-Composition from you soon, as i know you can do it, and do it really well.

Continuing with the Scale Materials Chapter in Persichetti's "20th Century Harmony" I wrote this Clarinet Quintet. The prompt was "8. Construct a solo clarinet line in the lydian mode supported by phrygian string quartet harmony. Set both the melody and harmony on the tonal center Bb." Thanks for listening and I hope you enjoy and let me know what you think!

A+ for presentation, something I lack around here. I love how detailed your score was, and that you posted multiple versions to appease any taste in reading along. I preferred the color coding, as I'll admit I got lost in the thick of dissonance trying to find synergy with the theme, but your score made it very clear and more enjoyable for me. I was really intrigued by the chromaticism and dissonance. It sounded too harsh at times, but the more I listened I got used to the language and texture and it flowed really well for me. Forgive my ignorance, but I've never really been into fugues. I don't know/forget all the intricacies involved, but your ledger of HOW you wrote it was very helpful and dare I say educational for me. The amount of effort you put into detailing your music was enlightening as well as lovely to hear. Thanks for posting this, as well as being involved in the forum! I can't speak for everyone, but the music I post here is barely heard by the people around me, and a community that is aligned with my passion AND that I get to help grow has a special place in my heart. It's people like you that help keep YC alive 🙂 Cheers friend, well done

Hi to all my fellow musicians. Here's my latest piece for piano, that I spent the last two days writing. Haven't quite finished the phrasing and dynamics yet. I may possibly extend the work; but I'm not quite sure yet. Hopefully I haven't accidentally stolen ideas from other pieces I've heard? I know the initial chord progression of C#m to Am(maj7) came from a You Tube video; but can't remember which piece they were discussing. (Pretty sure it was from a film score; but can't remember which one.) Anyway, hope you like it. I wrote it for a concert in May. P.S. Can you guess which composer inspired me to write this? (N.B. Revised scores will be posted below.)

to be frank I actively avoided making this piece too diffrent from the original, as I share the proccess of creating my piece on youtube, and people really want to hear something the recognize instently. I appreciate the kind words a lot though, thank you so much.

totally fair points, I might fix it in the future thank you so much! funny people here follow after my youtube I'm now kind of regretting I didn't bother making that piece playble though

Hi https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ajinQMxk-QgKfzxODtrkC7839OCZmPYx/view?usp=sharing

Great work. There are brilliant parts and some very original arrangements. However, I think that at times it is too literal with respect to the original song, which isn't bad, it's just a matter of taste. The introduction is very good, distributing the melody between the strings and the winds. I think the first verse forgets this dialogue a little and relies heavily on the strings, which then move to another level but continue to carry the melody. There are some tessituras that I think are unnecessarily out of place, if they are even possible to play effectively (double basses in 29 and 30). There are also several instances where the strings split into several notes and it is unclear whether they are double-triple stops or divisi. I also find it strange to see the piccolo and flute in unison, with the former in a very low register. In conclusion, I see a huge amount of work that sounds good. But orchestrating is not easy, and the orchestra you have chosen is quite large.

A fascinating instrument. Tiorba is how I know it in my language. I don't know anything about how to write for this instrument. I thought, perhaps associated with the Baroque and its use as a continuo, that the lower open strings were for the bass. Although it seems that you use it differently.

A lovely theme and a quite pleasant orchestration. It reminds me of an Italian Movie score from the 60's ... 70's ... Nicely done. Mark

Sylva Train Runnin' | Official Motion Picture Score from A Fire Within Hello! Over the last calendar year, I have been creating my first short-film called A Fire Within. When completed, the film will follow the tragedy between two friends: Sam and Andy. The story focus on the theme of betrayal as being cordial does not stop greed or jealousy from bubbling within someone. This score is paired with a travel sequence in the film and is my 4th attempt at writing for Big Band Swing. I am very happy with the result and simply wanted to share it! The style was meant to replicate late 40s/ early 50s swing to match the era in which the story takes place. I sampled a little of Miller's "Chattanooga Choo Choo" to help tie into the railroad theme with the main structure being based in verse-chorus with multiple repeats and a key change. If you would like to know more about the score, go to the "About" section on page 4! ________________ Program Note: A Fire Within is an original story written by Mason Kistler detailing betrayal between two friends. Featuring an original soundtrack, soundscape, voice cast and more, this story established itself as the first short-film made solely in the video game Railroader, which was released in December, 2023. Join the orchestra as they bring you in towards this cinematic universe and involve yourself in their soundscape. All aboard as the saxophones open the throttle and the ensemble leaves the station! [DO NOT REPLICATE]

Thank you for the suggestion! The score is also on IMSLP and I think it is great to see the orchestration and musical devices they use. One day, I too plan to add my addition to the repertoire on steam engine : D To add, I've updated the score in my OG post as I have now changed a few parts.

It's been too long! I thought I would share this piece written for my theory and composition class at Berklee. We were asked to work with a couple of "exotic scales" from a selection including the whole-tone scale, the octatonic scale, and modes other than those derived from the major scale. I felt drawn to the Lydian Augmented and Spanish Phrygian modes. I ended up with a contrapuntal rock instrumental in rough ABCA' form. The A section is in B♭ Lydian Augmented, the B section is in G Spanish Phrygian, and the C section an unbroken transition into D Spanish Phrygian. Finally, I modulate with the common tones D and A back to B♭ Lydian Augmented, for the A' recapitulation. The title (Iridescence) was inspired by my understanding of modes as a concept. With many modes sharing the same collection of notes, the tonic note that each mode centers on is what makes it unique -- gives it a unique color. And, iridescence is when something appears in different colors depending on the angle of viewing. I see that as a fitting metaphor. The artwork is my own, made with ProCreate. I didn't paint it for this track, but as a birthday present for my mother, inspired by Kate Bush's song "Kite". She is a massive fan of Kate's and introduced me to her when I was a little girl. I rediscovered her recently and I've been spending a lot of time with her early work. My current favorite album is Never for Ever...whose influence I thought was bleeding into this track. So, in the end there is some relation. 🙂 I hope you enjoy! Any feedback on both the mix and composition is more than welcome. ~ GP P.S. I was required to include a detailed score for the assignment. It might be too precise for a rock track in general, but if enough people are interested I will upload that, too.

Hello @Gwendolyn Przyjazna! I am always interested in pieces featuring „exotic scales“ and modes and so I was excited to find out how your „progressive rock instrumental“ would sound like. Since you didn’t provide a score I could concentrate on listening: My impression is, that the harmonies sound very smooth together – not as dissonantly as in some of @PeterthePapercomPoser’s Persichetti excercises, for example „Persichetti Exercise 2 - 56 for Clarinet Duo“. Thus, producing a dreamy, melancholic sound where especially the transition section from 01:52 to 02:26 reminded me indeed at Kate Bush! I must admit that I had to lookup what the Lydian Augmented and the Spanish Phrygian scales are all about. And so I found the reason why they are gentler or even more similar each other than I expected in the pair Lydian/Phrygian: The Lydian Augmented scale is more „darker“ than the traditional bright Lydian mode (which sounds paradoxical at first glance), while the Spanish Phrygian scale sounds much more „brighter“ than the original Phrygian one due to its major third. You added the tag „counterpoint“ to the piece so that I was curious how a counterpuntual rock instrumental would sound like. But to be honest, I get the impression that for most of the piece, you only had one voice with a melody, while the other instruments accompanied in chords or long notes, so I have to admit that I didn't really understand what you meant by “counterpoint”. Thank you for sharing, I very enjoyed it!

Hello @MK_Piano! Yes, that’s really a good swinging big band piece which immediately reminds at Glenn Miller’s „Chattanooga Choo Choo“. Good old steam trains seem to have inspired many composers and musicians because of their „sound“ which comprises „rhythmic“ elements (the start of the locomotive, increasing and decreasing speed, the rattling noise when driving over the track joints) and melodic elements (the puffing of steam, the whistling of the locomotive, or the squeaking of the wheels when braking) which animate to be imitated musically. Who would write a piece inspired by the noises a nowadays train produces? Another good example of a piece dedicated to a steam locomotive is Arthur Honnegger's “Pacific 231”, which is not a jazz piece, but rather a dramatic symphonic work. I liked it very much and I must say that the repetitive character mentioned by @PeterthePapercomPoser didn’t bother me, especially taken into account the purpose of the piece as soundtrack for a movie where it does not appear in its entirety but is cut into parts to underpin the individual scenes. Or whenever it would be played in a bar as the background music, the most visitors would not even notice it.

Wow this is great! And you're getting a performance? Very happy for you, you should update this with the audio once you get it! I've made edits to my music posts too, and I think it's easiest to add the revised audio to your original post, or just remove the old one and replace with the new. That way when people click on your music they're greeted with the version you want them to hear 🙂 Great stuff, looking forward to hearing more from you

Dude these are hard to keep up with lol... but I guess I've been busy and haven't been on here as much... sorry! Listening... Ok cool! I'm almost finished with a counterpoint in two voice piano type of piece, so this is right up my alley. The language is different, but the upper part kinda looks familiar lol. I really wonder if it would have sounded better having the intervals closer together, but with them far apart it was like an eerie bi-tonal carnival ride to me or something 😄Were you mainly thinking of the consonance of intervals? It was dissonant but smooth. I know it was just an exercise and you had a prompt, but what about texture change? I'd love to hear staccato bass or something, even if just a segue in the middle. Cool piece! Have any of these exercises given you grander ideas for the themes you've used? What do you feel you've gained so far in these compositional studies? Hopefully your next major work has even more craftsmanship from your work. Well done!

Some badges must me earned. Some are given freely, but there is one badge that rules them all. Legend holds that a mysterious "better than thatguy" badge is given only to a chosen few. You must search through the members profiles and sift through their badges to gain further knowledge. I wish you well in your quest.

Hi @MrBelegro! Welcome to the forum! For the Outstanding Orchestrator badge, you may look into pieces below which are awarded the badge for your reference: For the "Better than Thatguy" badge, actually it's named so because one of our moderator's username is @Thatguy v2.0, so you may check out his works to see if you are better than him or not lol! Henry

Hello @Tunndy! You have picked the perhaps most covered or orchestrated rock/pop song ever, the iconic Bohemian Rhapsody, which I consider to be a huge challenge. Everyone who hears the piece knows it and has its own expectations in the sense of „does it sound like the original“. I had the chance two years ago to attend a live performance of an orchestra and choir, and I was impressed how realistic that was performed - very close to Queen’s original sound. But that's also the problem when everyone is sensitized to noticing every little “mistake” or deviation from the original: you're faced with the challenge of bringing your own personal touch or interpretation to it. And that's exactly what you've done very well. The longer I listen to your orchestration, the more I notice some beautiful interpretations that really make it “your” piece. I particularly liked the ending, from bar 103 onwards! However, I could imagine that this personal interpretation could go even further. Therefore, as an inspiration, I have linked a YouTube video of David Bennet who reinterprets Bohemian Rhapsody in different modes or scales, which I find very fascinating. Thank you for sharing, I very enjoyed it!

Mother and Son 12-9-25.pdfHi all, Once again I resurrected an old work which needed a dusting off and a new look. It's called Mother and Son ... I describe the playful and sentimental interactions of a Mother and child as they play/interact in the park. Mark

Hi Tunndy, I notice your glissando lines have gone a bit haywire in Bars 54-55. Also in Bars 23 and 41 Violin II, you should flip the direction of the note stalks to make it clear what's going on there. Same in Bar 61 Violin I. Bar 55: some rests need deleting in the harp and Violin I. Same in Bar 66 Bass Drum, and Bar 69 various instruments. Plus a few more places where you have unnecessary rests. Bar 74: voices need tidying. Other than that good job! Also liked your recent Liszt orchestration of "La Campanella".

Another Persichetti prompted piano piece. This time the prompt was "24. Extend the following chromatically ornamented piano passage." The form ended up being ABACBA. Thanks for listening and I hope you enjoy and let me know what you think!

I don't know why, but it sounds neoclassical to me. I imagine this piece in an 18th-century drawing room. I think it has an intimate, somewhat playful feel to it. Good work on these exercises.

I‘m glad to hear that, and to see that you are not too „disappointed“ or overwhelmed by the discussions. Since I see that you are (again) in „good hands“ with @muchen_ continuing a detailed discussion, I will not go so much in detail, but give only some more general thoughts. I‘ve noticed your new version (v3.mp3 – not yet v3m.mp3). Will say that I put it together with the first one on my playlist and listened them, in a loop, perhaps a dozen times while walking. I do the same with my own compositions (where I use different piano soundfonts producing 10 different recordings of the same piece) and listen to them extensively while I take a long walk. This approach helps me to judge the piece whether it is fluent and I get distracted from my thoughts every time something „rattles“. Will say, a more relaxed review on the work thru listening only – being away from the score – is very useful to find out bars which need overhaul or get new ideas how a piece could be continued. Coming to the two versions of your invention I‘ve listened, I must say they are only slightly different (which is good in the sense that your corrections/modifications had no impact on the overall mood). The longer I listened them, the more I loved the subject with the repeated notes! Yes, in the first version there are the few bars, where the „octaves“ produced a bit „thin“ sound in the counterpoint. They have gone away in the newer version (what is good) except of – in my listening impression - two bars, one at the first subject entry in the lower voice and one bar nearly the end. So, I will now look to the score to see whether I can find out what I thought to have heard. ... The one bar which retains to sound „thin“ is bar 4 and the other one is bar 22. Yes there is an octave on an A on the second of the repeated notes. But I think, it‘s not the octave only - there are other ones on a C in bar 3, last of the repeated notes and on a F# in bar 5, second of the repeated notes – which don‘t need „correction“ in my listening impression. I think the „problem“ in bars 4 and 22 is more harmonic nature, I would replace the three sixteenth notes in the upper voice [G A B] with [E# F# G#] emphasizing the dissonance between B major and the four repeated A naturals. Because this was more detailed than I initially intended to be in this repost, so take it not too seriously. The more general question I have – and you probably have yourself – is what do you intend with, for example, this particular invention. If it is an exercise, you‘ll have learned something, especially about „octaves“ – and can leave it at that, going to the next one. But perhaps this is not the best idea to continue with the 1601st exercise, as you seems to me to be already somewhat „overteached“ and „overpracticed“. If you are about to create a „full fledged“ composition of it, we could further talk about episodes, cadences and a more elaborated ending. However, I suspect that you would prefer for that purpose another piece with a subject of your own, which than will be „complete your baby“. For that case, I would suggest you to put your composition in a more larger „framework“, such as in a cycle of, for example of six or twelve inventions, calling it somewhat like „Mein Notenbüchlein“ 😅. I think, that‘s quite enough for today! Greetings, Wieland.

Hallo @TristanTheTristan! Even your Sonatina has a length of a Sonata, I think it was wise to call it „Sonatina“ only, due to its youthful spirit and its refrain from the drama and heaviness of a „full-fledged“ sonata. So it is a cheerful, enjoying piece at all! However, what refuses me to count it as a piece that I would enjoy to put in my playing list is its hyperactivity expressed by the much to fast and repeating passages with ornamentations (trills, tremolos etc.) which heavily remind me on your signature „TristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristanTristanTheTristan ….“. I can therefore only emphasize @PeterthePapercomPoser' questions about playability for a human performer and would love to hear the piece as it would be interpreted by a real pianist, whether it's a live recording or a recording from a MIDI file. In the latter case, however, more sensitivity to the technical abilities of a human pianist and their enormous nuances in articulation, dynamics, tempo, etc. would be required.

This time I wrote a piece inspired by an exercise from Chapter 2 of Persichetti's "20th Century Harmony" on Scale Materials for 2 Bb Sopranino Clarinets and Bb Bass Clarinet. The prompt was "14. Construct a canon for three clarinets in which each performer plays a different synthetic scale on a different tonic." Synthetic scales are scales that are "specially constructed, often non-traditional scales created by altering, adding, or omitting notes from standard diatonic (major/minor) scales." I chose to use the written C Acoustic Scale, F Ukrainian Dorian Scale, and B Phrygian/Dorian Scale. I've been told that I should have perhaps tried to choose scales that would sound more harmoniously with each other. But, funny enough, that's exactly what I was trying to do. I didn't choose scales at random but tried to tailor each part of the canon to the previous material by improvising a scale and only later figuring out what scale I was using. But let me know what you think! Thanks for listening! P.S.: I have added a 2nd version of the piece where I have changed the relations of the tonics to each other to be tertian rather than quartal as in the 1st version. In the 2nd version I use written C Acoustic Scale, E Ukrainian Dorian Scale, and G Phrygian/Dorian Scale. Let me know which you prefer!

Hallo @Frederic Gill! I have read the thread about your „2-part invention in counterpoint“ and since there had already been lively discussions I decided to take a look on another piece which has not got a review yet. I like the motif (or „subject“) which is indeed somewhat „stubborn“ because of its repeated notes (but there are many famous fugues with repeated notes in the subject). And so, your decision to vary the motif sometimes to avoid that repeated notes is quite a good idea. The counterpoint is well chosen rhythmically, giving the entire piece a continuous flow and its „funny“ character. As far as I remember from the other thread, there were some dispute about „parallels“ and „octaves“ which was – also in my opinion – somewhat „overteaching“ (I couldn’t follow all arguments or „issues“ without going into detail too deep), so that I can understand that you’ve deleted most of the posts. But to be honest, after listening to your E minor invention, I can understand what the other commenters meant: Not „parallel octaves“ (or „parallel fifth“ as to be avoided in counterpoint generally) are problematic, but only the occurrence of the same note (in an octave) on a strong beat that makes the piece sound something „thin“ at that particular note. This is the case in a two-voice counterpoint only. If you had a third or fourth voice there would be enough harmonic material overall (and that might be the reason that writing a two-part fugue is much more challenging than a three- or four-voice fugue and why there are so few of them). I think, you can solve the problem, for example by varying your counter-motif in that places where it creates the octave. You will then lose the smooth motion at these points and have to insert a leap, but that might emphasize the humorous character of the entire piece!

Well! That quite possibly might be the most interesting thing I've heard in a long time. A very tricky thing to put together. Myself, I've always found canons far more difficult to write effectively than fugues, so therefore I must commend you. This is a very effective little piece. I must say, I don't much care for the sopranino clarinet up top, far too shrill, and I find myself wondering if the whole top part mightn't sound better on a regular B-flat clarinet an octave down. I suppose the texture is more modern for it though as is, and therefore part of your plan. Great work!

Thanks for your detailed thoughts! When I mentioned monotony, I was referring more to the process of working with a long, slow subject - after a while the contrapuntal development itself felt a bit repetitive to write. The fugue was an exercise I worked out on paper with pen, mainly as a kind of contrapuntal puzzle, which I've always enjoyed doing as a hobby. That said, you're absolutely right that the playback could be improved. I didn't add any articulation or dynamics, so the notation software makes everything sound much flatter than it would in a real performance. I'll try revising it along the lines you suggest to make it sound more natural. Thanks again for taking the time to comment!

What about 'better than Peter'? @PeterthePapercomPoser

Unique and very calming. The crescendo and decrescendo throughout gives the piece an interesting sense of grounded emotional instability.

Thanks for the comment! You’re absolutely right that thinning out the texture can help keep things fresh — that idea crossed my mind as well while writing. I treated it more like a fugue d’école rather than a stylistically Baroque fugue (the subject itself is a 20th‑century textbook theme), so I kept the four‑voice texture going longer than I normally would. I also thought about extending some of the three‑voice spots, but the subject is already pretty long and the tempo is on the slower side, so the whole thing was starting to feel a bit too stretched out. Still, your point is totally valid, and I appreciate you mentioning it. Glad you enjoyed the fugue!

For future fugues, to break up the monotony, maybe you could have more sequences with less voices? For most of Bach's 4-voice fugues, like half the fugue is for less than 4 voices. So having lots of 3 or 2 voice sequences and switching which voice combinations are doing said sequences really helps with monotony. Thank you for the enjoyable fugue 🙂

Hi there, @MinGry, welcome to the Forum! This is a decent piece of music, for a start, although, I do realize there a lot of compositional errors too. Bars 1-2: One of my favourite parts. It kind of has a nice, catholic tone to it. I would say, this quiet opening really fits my style. Appreciate that, though stop writing tempo numberic markings, and start using muiscal terms more. (eg. Allegro; Fast, or Largo; Slow, etc.) Bars 2-4: This is where things start to get messy. you have a clear sense of 'adequate rhythm'. The problem with the piano's entrance is how it just sits there like the ending of the second movement in Haydn's 34th Sonata. You have a plain, split-up C7th Chord. Not interesting. This is the entrance of the piano! Not at all. It feels like some kind of bystander, doesn't it? (for reference of the chord type reference, go to 9:53, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Db-XgC7tUqM) And, also, there is a lack of pattern. There is at the first beat there, and then you lose it. It becomes a mess. One of the key principles of composition as I have learnt from my teacher was opposite movement and balance. Here, you are just moving one way. Up. (Until the last beat, but, yeah, just talking about the majority here...). That part can be rethought, can't it? Bar 5: you have a good idea here. Decent, to the least. the piano plays a memorable sequence. You got my recognition here. Piano plays a great accompaniment alongside a melody. Wait?! Melody! I forgot that! Anyways, the melody is a single note of a strict f? No literally, the tonic is just sticking there like, I don't know, some person that stands in the rain for hours. Kind of, I don't know. Interesting. But I see what you you wanted to embrace there. You wanted to tell us, 'Guys! This is the start of something big!' Sadly, though, you could have done that in other ways too, other than saying 'F!' (not done yet, gonna come back later)

38 years or so, this was 1997!

"Be Honest"

I have several: Music theory matters and learning everything about it should be one of your top priorities Just because a few people out there have different tastes/opinions doesn't mean it's all "subjective" Get it right at the source; "mixing" can't do anything about bad pieces and crap timbres It's better to be great at one genre of music than middling in many Don't forget about woodwinds Avoiding "parallel harmony" in melodic lines to mentally appease the spirit of Bach, who is dead, will hold your orchestrations back from their full potential Work with live musicians as much as possible Compose something every day A 2 minute piece people want to play on repeat is better than a 5-minute epic they'll only listen to occasionally Improvisation has its place, but you should use it sparingly; every note should have real thought behind it. Friends don't let friends imitate Schoenberg A recording/mockup should be seen as inseparable from composition rather an interpretation of it and should therefore be as polished and the very best presentation of your piece as possible; "raw" or "live sound" is usually a cope.