Leaderboard

As a violinist, I've always felt today's musical landscape is missing something with the general absence of any modern violinist-composers along the lines of Paganini, Wieniawski, Sarasate, and so on to contribute new and exciting pieces to the repertoire. But since I'm both a violinist and a composer, I figure I might as well throw my hat in the ring and try to fix that. I've written four pieces by now, though I'd only ever performed two -- until recently, when I got to premiere the third. I composed this piece back in 2020, shortly before the entire world shut down. But recently I finally found a good opportunity to perform it, so I gave the "world premiere" on November 9, 2022. Unfortunately it was not recorded except on a phone at the back of the hall, and the massive echo made it sound pretty muddy. So I got a recording session in today in order to get higher-quality audio. Here's the end result: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WghXNdOc-VY The indication "harm." in the part is not me being too lazy to make diamond noteheads -- it is the notation used by violinist Roman Kim (one of my biggest inspirations and another torch-bearer of modern violin composition) to indicate the use of the forced harmonics technique he invented. It sounds one octave higher than written, is fingered exactly as written, and always lasts until the following "ord." mark. They appear at timestamps 2:15 and 3:56. While exceptionally challenging to master, they unlock some sounds that would otherwise be impossible to produce, so I think it would be interesting if the technique could become more widely learnt and incorporated into more modern violin writing.

@guseyn I love this. It's like Lilypond but much easier to use. I can actually see really huge potential for something like this. I think the reason why you are getting negative feedback is because some people are confused on the differences between a music notation software, and an engraver. Music notation editors do have their limitations. A music engraver is more focused on layout and beauty, whereas a music notation software is focused on entering notes, sequencing and playback. Have you tried it? This looks much easier to use, and I like how it renders the music as you type your text. With lilypond, you have to compile your code to generate a PDF and that gets really cumbersome. Just want to point out that engravers are a different type of software than a music notation editor. They are generally more tedious to use, but focus on output results. The examples are beautiful to me. But if you don't like the font, I'm sure @guseyn can create options to update the font to something more modern looking. Don't let the font fool you though, take a look at how the score formatting looks. Your biggest thing to look out for is collision, and spacing.

The first piece is quite simple. Because of the I-V harmony and the constant rhythm it's not very interesting. The second one, however, is nice. I see you try to stay safe in the counterpoint using mostly chord-tone, which is not bad, but it makes the piece sound a bit jumpy sometimes. There are many octaves that would be avoided working with two or three voices, and subsequently, there are some parallels. In all, the piece sounds very good.

Here's a big piece for ya'll. I think this is the first Theme and Variations that I have ever finished, so that's something. I was so addicted to this theme that I decided to make variations out of it. Anyways, there are 25 Variations, and it's 30 minutes long. Yes, it's that big. It was a challenge to compose this piece because I didn't know how big it could get, and pacing the different variations between the loud, fast, and slow was also tough. But the most frustrating of all was, of course, creating the score. It was painful!! Took me 3 weeks!!! Arghhhh I hope you have time to listen to this one but if you don't, I understand. Put a lot of effort into this one and I feel like I need a break lol. Hope you guys enjoy the piece!

There is definitely a logical progression going on between the different variations, but I thought the transition between I and II was kind of sudden. Notation nitpick: in variation V, meas. 119, I felt like it would have been more logical to have that C# chord as a Db since you have an F natural and are using flats in that measure. Another notation nitpick: in variation X basically throughout the whole variation, you use sharps as opposed to flats pretty consistently, but there are weird enharmonics and misrepresentations of intervals (such as the augmented 2nd in meas. 190 between the D#'s and F's). If you're going to be consistent with using sharps you should spell your F's as E#'s to make it apparent at a glance that it's the 3rd of a C# major chord (meas. 196). But to me at least it does seem like it would have been better if you used flats in this variation even if it does lead to Cb's in certain places. Also - I noticed a mistake in your score - in meas. 208 you label that variation as variation X even though the previous variation was variation X (I think this one should be XI because the one that follows it is XII). In variation XIII, meas. 258 - 263 it seems like that spot would have been really well suited to be displayed on multiple staves like you did earlier in the piece, for clarity. As is that part has a ridiculous number of ledger lines below the left hands treble clef. Yet another notation nitpick: in variation XIV, meas. 272, I would have used Eb's instead of those D#'s you employ because it organizes the pitch classes into more neatly stackable tertian chords (an Eb, G, B and D makes a really nice Eb augmented major 7th chord btw - nice). In 274 I can understand why you might want to use a D# there because in that case it's a #11 of an A minor 9 chord. In meas. 283, that D7 b9 doesn't have a 5th in it so it might be preferable to spell it as D, F#, Ab, C, Eb instead of using sharps like you did - that's also a really cool chord. Some really colorful sonorities you use in this! In meas. 289, 293, and 303 you might consider using Bb's as well instead of A#'s. It seems like you're borrowing those from D minor. I couldn't actually sustain this level of detailed reviewing throughout the whole piece, but overall I think you did a great job with these variations! I've listened to this piece multiple times now all the way from beginning to end and find each hearing more enjoyable than the last. Regarding the different tonalities you visit throughout these variations, I personally didn't see you clinging to C major too much at all. You start in E major, visit Db major, Eb major and D mixolydian, among, I'm sure, many others. As far as favorites go, I liked variations VI, XIV, and XVI the best. Towards the end I felt like the variations took on a "really long winded preparation for an end that never comes" kind of quality. Bartok always tried to end his pieces succinctly by abbreviating his recapitulations and such. Not sure if that's really applicable in this piece though. Thanks for sharing this gargantuan piece! Great job!

So I listened to this when you first posted. I needed some time to process such an immense piece lol, and I relistened tonight. First off, wtf dude. This is some serious composing. I could go on and on about how much I love this. Your variations were clever and definitely had a wide range of difference. I'd disagree about the sameness in harmony, I think you needed that to keep it coherent for the variations that went off into space (although it did wear on me a bit, probably because it's 30 min. long). You could have maybe drifted away from a C tonal center a bit more if you were worried about it, but it didn't really bother me. I really admire the care you took in your transitions. Some were woven into the next variation, while other's had a more cadential ending. That's my favorite thing in writing a theme and variations. I really enjoy fitting each piece together seamlessly; so many of the style sound blocky to me...like here's a variation, then another, then another. But the key for me is to make it a piece of music, rather than have "pieces" of music. Awesome changes in texture too. For the most part, it's like you knew right when I was getting bored of a thick texture, or bored of a slow one. You did a tremendous job taking the listener back and forth between so many different ways of presenting the theme. I have to commend you on your score as well. It's pristine, and crystal clearly shows how much time you put into it. It was fun to follow along the journey the whole way through. I only have a few criticisms, and just know they're probably subjective and minor. This was truly a masterwork. The first time I listened, I really liked it, but knew I was missing something. It wasn't until the second time I listened that I figured out what it was. There is such charm in the theme, which I'm guessing you attached to that too. I really love the theme (never played the game before :P). Even though you dispersed the theme throughout very well, and most of the time it's easily recognizable, I felt like there were other times it gets buried under an assault of complexity. For instance, right away with the first variation, I'm hit with thick chords and a jaunty rhythm. Maybe that's what you were going for, but I would have eased my way into a thicker language. On the second listen, I didn't feel that way as much. In fact, maybe hardly at all. But was it because I knew what I was looking for? It's hard to tell, but my point is, this is 30 minutes long. How many people will listen intently all the way through, then listen again to really grasp or get it. Possibly, I'm dumb lol. But that was just my impression. Like I said though, I don't want to detract with how much I enjoyed this one. This is truly a wonderful work of art, you should be very proud. You've made me a fan of your writing, and I admire your skill in composition; it far outweighs my own.