Leaderboard

I'll say it a million times over: Non-profit, non-profit, non-profit, non-profit, non-profit.

Noche y Revelacion Opus 24 for Orchestra. One of the very first things that I came to YC for, was asking for advices on how to make the orchestral works get performed, that time I showed a tiny excerpt of a work that is by all means, huge. The best and easier advice was that I should write for a smaller orchestra, and that’s makes perfect sense because will be difficult to find a large orchestra willing to perform a big piece from an unknown composer so that’s what I did. These were the main aspects I decided to follow: - A perfect normal size orchestra, with no need of a single extra player (maybe percussionists) - Short in length (I thought in 10-12 min, but I wrote 16 min) - Easy to play and to listen for common audiences - (Able to create a recording with my current software) This work has two sections, the soft one and the hard one…. The Night: (0:00 - 8:40) An atmosphere of mystery and quietness, I use some elements similar to those 70’s movies soundtracks (Airport 77 etc …) like the deep horns and the very high violins (The highest note in the score is a Ab6, I double checked with my two violins and the highest note possible without playing beyond the fingerboard is precisely a G#/Ab so I don’t think is “unplayable” because the melody is slow) The Revelation: (8:40 - 15:50) War Music…. I still cannot compose an orchestral work without a war/military segment, each time I write something loud I end writing music has a clearly war ambient. This is actually very easy to me to write, it took me only 25% of the total time I spend writing this work, the “night” part took me months… the only part I found a little difficult in this second part was the to build a proper “decrescendo” after the greatest climax, different to all my previous orchestral works I end in softness but still in the “minor” I love so much, (with my signature very clear). Some loud segments may seem to some of you as a bunch of notes and nothing more but, believe me when I say, that’s the way I like it. I accept comments and reviews of course but just one thing …. I’ve seen member posting music like Mozart and others giving advices to write like Boulez, those advices are obviously rejected by the composer and all that just make to seem the composer as a fool for ignoring those precious comments …. Recording & Score here Sequenced on Sibelius 6 Recorded on Cubase SX 3 Samples by EDIROL Orchestral Additional Percussion samples from my own library Hope you like it

I'm pretty sure I understand your idea and I'm not too fond of it. I have seen this kind of thing before, but I don't think the idea has a lot of synergy with the purpose of YC. You're trying to find too many little extra features to buff up YC and I think if the site is run properly then it won't need any of that. I agree with the comment about the token exchange being gimmicky. Plus... people will invariably get pissed when they're denied a token or think they're not getting enough bang for their buck. There will be people who won't use them and people who might leave because of them, which isn't a great combination of possible outcomes to have to combat. Also... are we sure the auction idea will even work before you decide to revamp it? I haven't exactly seen it in action. I know I haven't been around much, maybe I've missed something?

Thanks a lot, but... It's time to let you all know that this was a little experiment. The piece was actually randomly 'improvised' - Literally button bashing, actually - with nothing but a vague aim in direction of mood. I was not going for a tragic, sad car crash episode, I was going for more fragile beauty. It was a wonder to see if I could pass it as hard work and much time, as a well thought-out modern composition, and to see if people would appreciate it as such. This goes towards the ongoing argument that modern classical is just random experimental noise, and that fans of it just appreciate it to back up their pretentious opinions. Of course that's not what I think, I spend 70% of my listening time in the modern era of classical. But it's interesting nonetheless. As for instrumentation - It's a single sound in the software 'Omnisphere'. The higher pitches seem to sound significantly different to the lower register, but that is simply the nature of the layered sounds. Of course, now you know, you should understand there is no score...

It's an excellent question, Justin. I believe orchestras are completely unique in the collective effort it takes to successfully pull off their objective. Not just do you have the decades of training by each musician, conductor, etc., but the composer as well, plus the instrument making over centuries of gradual evolution in their craft. I believe orchestras are evolving and so are the audiences. They will still be around in centuries to come but I don’t believe their role will be the same. To me the important question isn't really what's next for the orchestra, but rather what is next for writing serious music. This is a quote I really like: "A few twentieth century composers achieved extraordinary fame: Sibelius’s fiftieth birthday in 1915 was front page news in Finnish papers. It is inconceivable that anything like this would ever happen to a composer of classical music today. At best, he or she can only hope to create a mild ripple in the mass media pond. The last work whose premiere was a major public event was probably Britten’s War Requiem in 1962. The great communicators today are in the world of rock music." - Composer David Matthews. It seems around the 1950's and 60's, rock became the music that connects with the feelings of the audiences when classical music boldly alienated its audience. I think that hurts us today because ultimately music has to be a communicative medium - it has to say something of relevance to someone in my belief. Beethoven was a composer functioning at the peak of his creative powers where only classical music could be the canvas for his art and the orchestra being the greatest range of that canvas. I'm not sure if he was alive today, classical music would even be the pinnacle. It might be too restrictive. I believe popular music (music for the masses) and serious music have lived side by side for hundreds of years. But around the 1920's, and 1930's, with the advent of radio, film, then TV, and eventually internet, serious music is struggling to find relevance with an audience that is becoming increasingly interested in instant gratification. It is hard to justify sitting through an hour long concert piece if the best climax might be available on youtube or itunes in chunks. Ultimately, the ease of getting something reduces its value. I find this section from Igor Stravinsky’s autobiography relevant. In his very perceptive autobiography, he discusses the pros and cons of musicians reaching wider audiences and how the advent of new technology (he was referring to radio though it could just as easily have been the ipod, internet, or whatever) would ultimately weaken the reach of music because now it requires less effort from its audience. In this passage, Stravinsky convincingly makes the case that the ease that it takes listeners to hear music ultimately deadens their interest in music. "The propagation of music by mechanical means and the broadcasting of music - that represent formidable scientific conquests, which are very likely to spread even more - merit close examination as for their importance and their effects in the domain of music. Of course, the possibility for both authors and performers to reach the masses, and the fact that these masses are able to make themselves acquainted with musical works, represent an unquestionable advantage. However, it cannot be concealed that this advantage is dangerous at the same time. In the past, someone like Johann-Sebastian Bach had to walk ten leagues in order to hear Buxtehude perform his works. Today, any inhabitant of any country simply has to either turn a knob or play a record in order to listen to the piece of his choice. Well! It is in this very incredible easiness, in this very lack of effort that lies the vice of that so-called progress. In music, more than in any other branch of art, comprehension is only given to those who actively contribute to it. In itself, the massive reception is not enough. The listening of certain combinations of sounds, and the automatic growing accustomed to them does not necessarily involve the fact of hearing and grasping them, for one can listen without hearing, the same way one can watch without seeing. What renders people lazy is their lack of active effort and their developing of a liking for this easiness. People no longer need to move about as Bach had to; the radio spares them the traveling. Neither do they absolutely need to make music themselves and to waste time studying an instrument in order to know the musical literature. The radio and the disc take over. As a result, the active faculties, without which music cannot be assimilated, gradually atrophy among the listeners who no longer train them. This gradual paralysis leads to extremely serious consequences. Overwhelmed with sounds, the most varied combinations of which leave them indifferent, people fall into a sort of mindless state, that deprives them of all ability to judge, and renders them indifferent to the very quality of what they are served. In the near future, such disorganized overfeeding is more than likely to make listeners lose their hunger and their liking for music. Indeed, there will always be some exceptions - some people within the hoard will be able to select what they like. However, concerning the masses, one has all the reasons to fear that instead of generating love for and understanding of music, the modern means involved in spreading music will lead absolutely to opposite results; it is to say, they will lead to indifference, to the inability to recognize them, to be guided by them, and to have any reaction of some value." Igor Stravinsky - "Chronicles of My Life" – 1935 I believe serious music is in our blood. I read about an experiment where rats were tested by psychologists to see how they would react to Bach's music and rock music. The rats were placed into two different boxes. Rock music was played in one of the boxes while Bach's music was played in the other box. The rats could choose to switch boxes through a tunnel that connected both boxes. Almost all of the rats chose to go into the box with the Bach music even after the type of music was switched from one box to the other. According to an article that appeared in the LA Times recently, “Dr. Antonio Damasio, director of USC's Brain and Creativity Institute, is an expert on emotion and a committed musicophile. Even if music did little more than lift our spirits, he says, it would be a powerful force in maintaining physical and mental health. The pleasure that results from listening to music we love stimulates the release of neural growth factors that promote the vigor, growth and replacement of brain cells.” Responses to music are easy to be detected in the human body. Classical music from the baroque period causes the heart beat and pulse rate to relax to the beat of the music. As the body becomes relaxed and alert, the mind is able to concentrate more easily. Furthermore, baroque music decreases blood pressure and enhances the ability to learn. Music affects the amplitude and frequency of brain waves, which can be measured by an electro-encephalogram. Music also affects breathing rate and electrical resistance of the skin. It has been observed to cause the pupils to dilate, increase blood pressure, and increase the heart rate. You could see this as evidence that well written and well performed music won't go away. It's in our blood. My point here is ultimately that orchestras are competing with instant gratification cultures. There are some who respond better to the real deal, but that is increasingly rare with our current cultural mindset. Orchestras need to evolve to remain relevant. They need to be properly marketed and “sold” to new audiences otherwise their relevance will reduce. Orchestral composers need to create masterpieces that show the orchestra as the only device cable of expressing their musical vision. Note some orchestras are doing extremely well. Great question. Sorry for the extremely verbose response, I have a few opinions on this topic. ;)

Meh ok I see how it could work. BUT, I still wouldn't want a financial hold on my activity. It there was an opt-out, I would, at least at first. If there wasn't one, I simply wouldn't contribute. Besides, having a financial incentive to make reviews et al would cause problems with authenticity of opinion. If I make a small amount of change every time I review, then I'll give more reviews with lesser authentic opinion and help. Not to mention how it could be abused, so safeguards would have to be put in place.

That is a nice orchestration on an organ. for 2 violins it might work as well...

Okay, honesty time... and hopefully this will be helpful. First, overall, I think the work is film-esque. It would make for a great soundtrack to a movie or game (maybe even an audio book or some lengthy online commercial). So, keeping perspective in mind (that I like this 'for' that kind of genre), I want to just make sure to begin with a positive. You've put a lot of work and thought into this, I can tell. I think your ideas have grit and hold interest. So, these are all positive things that should be said... from beginning to end, you held my interest either with your sonorities in Part I or your intensity and (what I'll call) your 'vamping' of the rhythmic pattern in Part II. I'll dissect some of these things for each part below, but I've also got to bring you back to earth just a bit. A 15 minute piece is not 'short' in the professional performance arena. I have a 5'30" piece (Eternal, posted in this forum) that is likely too long to be programmed by a majority of professional groups. If I wanted to get an orchestra to read my work, I'd probably get 'some of it' read, maybe 2-3 minutes of it. Only if I was very lucky would the whole piece be read by a professional group from beginning to end (if the conductor asked the performers to remain an extra couple of minutes to read the whole thing and the performers agreed to rehearse it 'for free' - and performers like to get paid, they WILL make a fuss if they don't like the whole work). My strategy is to get the conductor and performers to just read 'some of the work' and 'want to hear the rest' as they are reading it. It's a longshot, but it's worth it if it works. I want my music to be convincing enough for performers to 'want' to keep playing it... This is your 'criteria' From a perspective of 'performance', the work is far too repetitive... you'll get a couple of minutes of reading time, professional performers will likely catch on to how repetitive the work is, and they may feel a little disappointed or disinterested. It's not about the sound or the quality of the work... I'm just trying to point out that this piece, when performers look at it, is going to be viewed upon with entirely different lenses. So, 'variation' and 'interest' are 'key' ingredients here that I just want to touch on. My suggestions are only 'suggestions', don't look at this as 'your piece sucks, this is better'... all I'm looking for are ways to create more variety in different sections of the ensemble where this repetition is taking place so your performers will not only love 'hearing' your piece, they'll love 'playing' it. Minor Score Edit Note: F Horns, when arranged on two staves, are traditionally grouped 1st & 3rd Horns on one staff, 2nd and 4th Horns on the next staff. I don't know if you were aware of this, I just wanted to make sure to mention it. Part I Strings (mm 1-22): You have the same, exact rhythm for 22 measures. I realize this is a mood-setting event, but you can break up some of the monotony through imitating the rhythmic events between the violins and violas. You might even like the sound of inverting some of your harmonies (keep the chords you have, just play with when the individual pitches sound and break those pitches up among the different string sections). You can create a 'sound-wave' from section to section which would be REALLY neat to hear from playing inside the orchestra, even if it caters more to the performers than to the audience. Brass (mm 23-40): Here you have some whole notes sustaining some harmony with 3rd Tpt and Tbn playing some scalar linear material somewhat sporadically. It might be more musically convincing for those lines to have maybe just a little more melodic shape to work contrapuntally with the other families of the orchestra in those measures. You could state in the 3rd Tpt/Tbn the beginnings of this contrapuntal material, then use the horns, 1st and 2nd tbns, and maybe solo 1st Tpt in the upper register to sort of reinforce this activity... which reinforces the purpose of the original lines you have dedicated just to the 3rd tpt and tbn. Woodwinds (mm 1-40): I'm just kind of bored with the use of the Piccolo and Flute... I think the 40+piece string orchestra is going to drown out most of your homophonic woodwind activity. What's interesting though, is you have nothing really doing much to reinforce the harp or dance around it other than the glock in the percussion. And night is a perfect time for little gestures like the Celeste/Glock (have you considered a Celeste instead of a Glockenspiel for that gesture, by the way?) to be reinforced by flutes and a piccolo. Let your Clarinets create some imitations of those gestures as well, deliver some real 'depth' to your 'Night'. And really try to develop that glock gesture more... give it a story, let it prance a little... give it more 'life'. Use the woodwinds to help you deliver that gestural component more convincingly so it doesn't feel so 'haphazardly placed.' Does that make sense? Percussion - in general, they don't really care in orchestra. They're happy playing something interesting, they're happy not playing at all. They're probably the group in an orchestra you can abuse the most... so I'll leave all of that up to you. Now, I've commented on Part I. If you want my comments on Part II, reply and I'll offer them. If this isn't helping you, then I'll stop here.

Yes I can give you the concert pitch, (I have used to read it in that way ...)(you should get used too ) The orchestration of the 2nd part goes against of many orchestral methods, ... but I could call that "my style" ... What you say about the Timpani is in Page 16 ???? no, the Tuplet is correct, that's the exact measure and accents way to played ... The Violins are in octaves without a whole octave in the middle, .... that will make a nice effect, different from the common octaved melody in Violins ..... something like using Flute 8' + Flute 2' in Pipe organ (without any Flute 4') On page 9, I might change the horns a little down .... but I do want the english horn alone.... (it can be playable the way it is, but with difficulty .... yes I know that) Thanks so much Weca for your review .... I promise, next time it will be more like a single work and not like 2 works in one. EDIT: To be honest, I like more the second part than the first, that's why I wrote it because I wanted more action in my work not just the "Night".

One more note about the final decrescendo - it would be even better if you used hairpins (>), this creates a gradual decrescendo rather than you simply writing "f, then mf, then p". ---------- Oh and one more thing - can you give us a score in Concert Pitch? Much easier to read :)

Daniel, some unorganized notes on your score: Your dark string writing at the beginning is ingenious and will come out very well. In the woodwinds and brass, I have seen Arab numerals (1. and 2.) more than Roman numerals (I and II) for marking where only 1 instrument plays. IF! you intend the timpani to do a "drag" pattern (like a snare) rather than measured sixteenths, it is better to notate like this: On page 6 you put TWO octaves between the violins. Writing them in 8ves is fine but putting an empty 8ve between will make it sound "thin." I would write the 2nds an 8ve higher as well, OR (my preference) bring the 1sts down an octave. Don't worry they will still "sound" very high as they are in fingerboard positions on their tense E strings. I am not a violinist but writing them as high as you do currently, looks excessive to me. BTW, I would also reinforce this melody with a flute or oboe, either would work fine. From page 6-9 the harmonies you use are wonderful. On page 9 those are high entrnaces (especially horn) for pp, and the horn goes even higher. The flutes will be more or less inaudible, playing in their low register, against brass. The return of the theme on p16 is very nice. However - again, the flutes will be inaudible here. In a tutti (strings+brass+winds) you can't score the flutes in their bottom octave, it usually won't sound. I also think that the solo trumpet, throughout, will not be anywhere near as quiet as he in this mix. Turn the trumpet sound way up and see if you still like the part. I really like the trumpet on p21 however. On page 25 you've got a nice setup but I really think the EH needs reinforcement. At the least, write the cue in the clarinets, and let's see, bassoons? And in rehearsal if it's too weak you can assign those instruments to help out. I have to say I did not like the "war" section AT ALL. It is much less imaginative in all ways - harmony, composition, and orchestration. Although, I did like the way you gradually orchestrated the decrescendo on page 76-80. However, I dislike the whole thing, to the point where I would split off the "Noche" section and have that played in concert by itself. It's truly wonderful, and self-contained, and has some really dreamy/jazzy moments. I am printing out that section of teh score to study your harmonies :)

well, now with the score check it because the recording may lie about how would it be in live concert .... I think it would sound very interesting the first part and very strong the second ... I only worry about the final decrescendo, it may be achieved correctly ONLY by a very good conductor. EDIT: If you have troubles viewing the score with the "preview" button try "download" or tell me if you're unable to see it

I like the version with less reverb better. You have a very good sense of development and harmony, I quite like the first half. Would have to see the score to judge the orchestration. It has the feel of a slow introduction to a 70s or 80s movie (in a good way!). WITHOUT seeing the score, the one thing I would be a little worried about is that for the first 3 minutes (before the grand pause and brass entrance) you use the bass voices of the orchestra nonstop. And, in the next section, you use the percussion quite steadily. Either of these effects may end up tiring the ear, live - it depends... ------------- Ha, awesome! Listening with the score now.

yeah the EDIROL sounds are not excellent .... but you'll have a more clear idea of everything reading the score ... Maybe the reverb is a bit excesive, here is a 2nd render with less reverb thanks for listening .... (the Render 2 has been removed,) the thread has been seen 42 times, the file has been heard 13 times and only 1 comment.. ------- Ok, I understand you cannot review without the score so I post it just as I have it now... I had a bad habit of never writing the slurs, so as the first time, the slurs might be wrong or even ugly .... Now is the score available

hi I like the dark tone of the opening. Listening jst to the sound I can hear you didn't write the slurs yet. Its a bit artificial sometimes yet. I heard (very early in the piece) a kind of trumpet (muted?) witch sounded unnatural (maybe jazz or pop patches while i'd expect a more classical sound?) . Maybe because of the lots of reverb? I usualy like my MP3's dry. Makes it more easy to listen to the details. I imagine you are looking for a blurry effect, with those nice harmonies. It has a movieish tone. One orchestrational thing. At the end of the night there is a oboe+clarinet (?) melody emerging from the massive chords. I would make it a single instrument, preferably oboe... But this might be matter of taste. What I liked about the Night was its slowness; but when the Revelation started I was a bit bored. Because of the slow harmonic progression. I wanted to hear something new (like the faster string section thereafter) Ok, I'll stop commenting. I like your harmonic language, its a bit similar to mine :)

Well of course you wouldn't since you're the one paying for everything out of pocket. How about, instead of using private funds, get YC to be finded by legit educational grants instead? YC is not a business, it was never founded on such a notion. YC is a community of people coming together to discuss a common intrest they love, music, and where older composers can educate the younger ones. This site is primarily about community and education. Both of those atributes (along with advocacy) are prime examples of non-profit organizations. What's awesome about non-profit then, is you can actually, get this, PAY your staff! If we have a small but efficiant group of staff members who run YC, then they can be promoting YC and the YC brand throughout the internet, to friends, music groups, etc. Make it their part-time *job* to promote YC. Imagine the effect that would have on viewership! This place would EXPLODE in numbers. Uploads would be incredibly high. Get people to donate to YC! Get grants! Make fundraisers where composers benefit. Use connecections to proffer performances! Imagine that! Performances advocated by a non-profit group. (The New York Philharmonic education dept and ASCAP already do that!) YC has always placed education and community first. Once money and profit get in the way (which they always do *cough* University of Phoenix *cough*), YC will fall apart because its more core principle would be taken away. And then it would just be a lot of investment money for nothing. If it were up to me, this site would be "YoungComposers.org" not ".com". We need to be an advocacy group for young composers out there who love to write but aren't sure how. Maybe that would involve providing paid services (like the Auction), but the YC organization should not take a penny out of it save for optorational costs. Remember, ASCAP started with one lone composer in the 1920s (Victor Herbert) who saw a need for composers. Today, we can follow that lead in a modern marketplace.