Leaderboard

Hey there Peter By now, I've heard so much of your music that I could probably pick it out of the bunch if it were in a pool of composers here. You have a distinct style, and an even more uniquely-you harmony that I'm always happy to hear when digging around in the YC forums. You have a sense of charm and wonder to your musical voice, something that always keeps me engaged and always wanting to hear more of your music. I love the classical/VGM hybrid style yours has. My immediate thought upon hearing this piece is that it would be really cool in a video game, even more so with an RPG element that I know you love so much. Whenever you create your own game, it'd be cool if you took this line of thought with it. Having a central theme within the game, but sporadically sprinkling variations throughout the progress or current situation the main character or characters are in. You definitely know your styles of music, as this piece was littered with the traces of your influences and studies. Multiple presentations were given throughout of your theme, most of the time with interesting dances and forms that you've learned through your years of studies and composing. It was cool to hear the theme played in so many fun and wonderful ways, you definitely are a connoisseur of the theme and variations genre. Ok, enough patting you on the back. Yes, you're a fantastic composer, and your knowledge shines in this piece as you took us on your audio journey. But let's get into the real criticisms, shall we? 😄 So first of all, the mixing you did was much better then the latest piano piece you posted. I heard virtually no clipping, so kudos on that. There were however multiple spots where there was a weird pop, or something. It could possibly be MS4's sound samples just being buggy, but they stood out to me. I noted a few, maybe there are others, but you might see what I mean (1:20, 2:06, 2:49, 3:19, 6:09, 6:46, 6:59, 9:17). Most were just minor, but I wanted you to know in case there was anything that could be done about them. Again, it wasn't a major thing, but they stood out to my ears. If it is a mixing issue, I'm curious how this is handled on Musescore. Did you import the mp3 to a DAW and raise the volume, or is this straight from MS itself? It could be the samples, but eh I don't know. Just know this wasn't anything major, but something to look out for going forward. As far as the music itself, there were two major issues I had as a fellow composer. One is something I tell you all the time, and you know, this is actually the last time I'm ever going to mention it. I'm honestly tired of saying it, and maybe it's just that we're different people with different tastes, but I'm not going to say this again. You like what you like, and I like what I like. But your texture all the way throughout has a very samey sound to it partly because you have every instrument playing nearly all the time. Don't you ever just want a solo phrase, or a duet? Or if all 3 are playing, maybe 2 instruments are playing a sparse staccato hit point type of accompaniment while your melody sings? I won't hammer this one too hard, but it's something I always hear with your music. If you like it like that, then fine. It's your music. But imo I think it could greatly benefit with drastic changes of texture. I've thought about the video game aspect of your music, and yes, some of that music has this same kind of thick textural vibe to it a lot of the time. But not all of it. And I'm not playing a game when listening to your piece (unless that's the intent?). So...in forever conclusion to this point, that's how I feel about it lol. Another reason it had a samey sound is that nearly all of the time the flute is the melody, the clarinet plays a counter melody, and the bassoon is the accompaniment. Not always, but I started to just look for the flute starting each variation with a Bb or C after a while. If you like it like that, that's fine, but think about it's register. Sure, you mentioned this was supposed to be for a brass trio, but I don't think the two ensembles are necessarily equivalent as far as high, medium, and low "sounds". If your intent is that it could be played by both brass and wind groups, sure that's ok, but the two to me are vastly different. When you made the decision to write for the winds, I really would have considered the flute's upper register, as well as the registers of the other winds that you used. Ok, maybe you start a lot of variation melodies on Bb or C, but why the same one? As you know, flutes have a range that loves those leger lines, take advantage of it! You could have easily bumped the flute part up an octave on several variations and this might have given the textural variation needed to my ears. Why have the flute so dominant with the melody? It would have been really cool to have the flute and clarinet playing some ethereal harmony while the Bassoon got to take the lead with the melody, or maybe having a fun but somber chalumeau clarinet melody while you could get creative with how the bassoon and flute played together. My impression is that you were disappointed that MS4 didn't play your brass parts as intended, so you settled with the winds without fully giving time to think about how the winds might handle your material differently. But to me, there were lots of opportunities to really explore deep with wind textures with any of your variations that weren't taken full advantage of. My only other constructive critique would be the actual form itself. I loved the idea of a form within a form, having a theme and variations molded into a rondo. I was maybe just hoping for more in that regard. It didn't feel like distinctive sections of a rondo to me, but merely just a good ol' fashioned and well written theme and variations. A thought I had to possibly pursue in the future is if you are to do this type of thing again, maybe have the theme and variations that are a part of the "A" section have transitions to each other, where it sounds like one continuous part. And when you finally move to the "B" section, have there be a cadential close like you ended each of your variations with. That way it would be easier to discern the rondo sections, without it being merely what key it's in, or whatever. Maybe having different tempos for the sections of the rondo as well? I don't know, just brainstorming here. Those were my biggest gripes, but I don't want to understate how much I enjoyed this one. I think one of it's strengths was how you employed creative and differing harmonies throughout the whole piece. The minuets were my favorite moments, I loved the darker bassoon lines underneath the other two instruments. I also really enjoyed the Lilt section. I'm not too sure what that form is, but I liked your trademark wonky odd meters used. You develop the theme very well, as always. I loved hearing how you continued to evolve each little moment of the theme as your piece progressed, you do a fantastic job at that. Especially the little descending moment at the end of each variation, I could tell you took great care in your craftsmanship as the music never got boring or stale. The ten or so minutes compiling the duration seemed to fly by, I couldn't believe it was over when it ended! I enjoyed the accelerando at the end too. The ending may not have been completely definitive to me, but I knew it was coming when you sped the music up. Possibly it was your harmoniously dissonant style in general that made me think that, but awesome ending, nonetheless. Overall, I think the musescore file sounded wonderful, a definite step up from the previous version. I'm not sure about all the instruments, but these three sounded vibrant and colorful all throughout. I prefer winds over brass, so although you may not be completely satisfied with the end result because you envisioned brass, I enjoyed this piece the dozen or so times I've listened to it now. Every once in a while I slip into the forums incognito and not on my profile, pilfering around stealthily to see what's happening around here. And more often than not, I'm checking out people's music that I've already heard before, and plenty of times it's your music I listen to, not to find some other thing to mention, but to just listen to out of enjoyment. Thanks for sharing my friend, your music can be complicated yet orderly, dissonant yet smooth, and sometimes bears features that make me comment critically, yet always finding enjoyable.

Hi The crab canon (cancrizans in Latin, cangrejo in Spanish) is know (wiipedia) as well as "retrograde canon, canon per recte et retro or canon per rectus et inversus)... is an arrangement of two musical lines that are complementary and backward. If the two lines were placed next to each other (as opposed to stacked), the lines would form something conceptually similar to a pallindrome. The name 'crab' refers to the fact that crabs are known to walk backward (although they can also walk forward and sideways). The most famous crab canon is the one Bach wrote for the Musical Offering. There are no many canon of this type, because it is more an exercise. It has its difficulty. The crab canon harmonizes one melodic line with itself in retrograde. So, you have to write a double (invertible) counterpoint, taking care of the fifth interval, because once inverted it becomes a dissonant fourth. So, fifths should be treated as dissonances. I have written, with time, some crab canon, just for fun and as a counterpoint exercise. But I had a concern with the possibility of writing a double crab canon. That is to say: two crab canon which can sound together. I have not seen any methods to to this. But I developed my own. I wrote a simple cancrizans 6 + 6 measures. Afterwards I wrote. second one in a lower register, having in mind the first. Third, I put both canon together. Fourth, I wrote the result with all the lines in retrograde. I think more combinations are possible, but taking care of the intervals. At least, it was fun. I'll keep this piece... Perhaps I use it in a larger format as a part of an orchestral work.

Yes, many times Ive use tool I learn and explain in my blogs. In my opinion, the more resources a composer knows, the better compositions he/she can produce. I make a distinction between writing short or very short exercises just to show how the tools work, and other larger compositions. The problem is I don't have time enough to do everything. As I said in another post, some day I'll have to stop and write something I want to.

Hey guys! I've been working on this piece for the past few weeks. It ended up sounding a bit more sad than I imagined it. I originally intended it to be for Brass Trio (Trumpet, French Horn, and Euphonium or Trombone) but Musescore's Trumpet wouldn't perform anything above a high concert D (or something). I was under the impression that virtuoso trumpet players should be able to play a high concert Eb especially if its approached by stepwise motion. So I switched the instrumentation to Flute, Clarinet, and Bassoon (again) but because of the way I wrote it, it should be possible to perform it with brass instead. The variations in this piece are all subtitled and I tried to follow a kind of rondo form with them: I - Fanfare, II - Minuet, III - March, IV - Waltz, V - Fanfare 2, VI - Minuet 2, VII - Scherzo, VIII - Siciliana, IX - Fugue, X - Lilt. The fanfares would be more fanfare-like if performed by brass (of course). I'm actually not sure if I'm completely done with this theme. I didn't even make use of any inversions, retrogrades or retrograde inversions of the theme in any of my variations. But I felt like the piece was already getting too long so I ended it here. But it would be easy to continue it later on with more variations just starting where I left off. I'd appreciate any of your constructive comments, observations or critiques! Thanks for listening.

You are right! Beethoven wrote the theme in the seventh of his 12 Contredenses, WoO 14, then use it in the finale of the Creatures of Prometheus, op. 43, then in the Eroica Variations for Piano, op. 35, then use it in the final movement of his Eroica Symphony! Very economical and "environmental" with all the recycling! 🤪 I do this myself actually, haha! I sometimes transform the themes from my unpublished, unfinished pieces or pieces I don't like to pieces I love!! Actually I have the same feeling with Vince. I know that you have transformed the theme in different ways, but I think the decisive matter here is the texture. I really think there's too many imitations between flute and clarinet, and bassoon should carry some melodic parts! Since the thema itself is very imitative, I would like to see some of the variations less imitative or even homophonic! I will check this out when I have time!! Thanks! I am watching all those details, hehe😎🧐!! Henry

@jawoodruff Thanks SO much! Clearly, to say the least, I'm not a violinist. I can easily eliminate the double stops in the orchestral version by distributing them between the primi and secondi. I'll think of a different solution for the violin and piano. Thanks for the notes about bowing and accents. I'll try and find a violinist friend to help me understand better with concrete examples, but in the meantime I'll just us my imagination and re-bow. Looking forward to writing a new version of this sonata with all the invaluable input of @PeterthePapercomPoser, @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu and yours! Thanks!

You must be thinking of the March variation or something ... ??? You didn't think any of the piece felt melancholic? Yes - I haven't written a fugue in a long time and I don't usually like it. I did go through a phase where I was crazy about writing fugues! And I actually wrote an Organ Variations (no - not variations in those types of organs) piece which had a chaconne and a couple of fugues in it that ended up being more than 10 minutes long! People who reviewed that piece were all like "why did you write so many fugues?" LoL But I guess you wouldn't have a problem with that haha. Yes - that kind of imitation made an appearance in a few places throughout the piece. The March is the first place where it happens. Then it also recurs in the last 4 variations too. Yes I agree with you that plenty of other elements of the theme could have been varied still. The piece should actually be over 30 minutes long! Muhahaha! But seriously, I do feel like I might return to this theme in another installation of more variations. I think Beethoven did that too right? He wrote a set of variations and then appended it with another publication of more variations on the same theme? I could be wrong. I do think this piece and the mistakes in it will help me write a future set of variations to be even better! (I hope) Btw - this is my 2nd set of variations for Wind Trio. I have another one in Bb minor too! Variations for Wind Trio in Bb minor Thanks! I don't think you're nitpicky. You're the life of the party! LoL Thanks so much for reviewing mine as well as sooo many others works with your keen eye for detail!

Thanks for the feedback, Omicron. It's always a relief to hear that I've managed to pull off a playable piano part. Yes, the groups that are interested in performing works they find on the internet by unknown composers are generally looking for something less virtuosic in my experience. The groups who specialize in very difficult new music tend to already have working relationships with well-established composers, who write commissions just for them, or the money and reputation to go solicit works in a contest. But there are a lot of talented groups out there who would love to premiere a piece, if it doesn't take all the rehearsal time away from the rest of their concert repertoire. Virtuosity is good for impressing contest judges and college admissions committees, but there are fewer groups outside of those conditions willing to take a chance on performing difficult pieces, so I like to have some works available at a variety of difficulty levels. Most of the music world has a limit to how much rehearsal time they can commit to any one piece. The pauses are just written in breaths. Since final consonants for singers fall on the rest, the piece shouldn't sound as gap-y in performance as it does in the demo. Directors spend a lot of rehearsal time dictating how the choir should mark up their scores for breaths, so when I have an opinion about where to put one and how long to make it for good breath support, to add a little rhythmic variety to the line, or to keep the text from sounding muddy with a big group or an echoey concert space, I like to go ahead and write it in. (Directors will absolutely change what you write if it doesn't work well for the group, the space, or the tempo they are taking, which is totally fine, but if you go ahead and let them know what you were picturing, a lot of people find that helpful to get feel for what they might do with a previously unperformed work). Where I don't have a strong opinion, I don't mark them and leave people to make their own decisions. The beginning of this piece is marked "rubato," so I was trying to offer some potential shape to the phrasing. Where the phrases could tumble on, one after the next, as parts of a larger whole, and where you could have a little lift, with each phrase its own separate unit. I hope that makes sense. I really struggled with what I wanted to do with this piece. The emotional peak happens after measure 33, so I didn't want to let up on the gas pedal and release the tension too soon, we have to have our cracking thunder, hordes of songbirds, and armies of bees before we can relax, but I agree, it does feel like a long time to go without an emotional break. I spent a lot of time fidgeting around with how long to make the preceding section, but ultimately this is what I ended up with. Mainly, I didn't want listeners to assume a piece about flowers and bees = pretty and sweet. I wanted to challenge that idea, and help people feel worried on behalf of the bees, and to see a bee's eye view of the flowers where everything in the landscape is huge and strange, and even frightening. I wanted deep unease and foreboding. So it ended up with a compromise: trying to create and sustain tension, without being unduly difficult for singers who don't have perfect pitch to sight-read. I'm still not sure how I feel about the end result. Hopefully someone will perform it, and then I'll let you know! Thanks for taking the time to give such a detailed review! 😄

Hi Peter, As always I really enjoy this composition! Actually for me I don't find it sad at all. All the minor chords for me are humorous and funny! Maybe there's some blues in it with the clarinet but overall it's joyful for me! Out of all these variations I enjoy the fugue most, since it's the variation when all three instruments have the independence of voice! I enjoy how bassoon carries the melody and subject, and wish the fugue will be longer! I also love the texture in b.164, since there are some imitations and echos between all 3 instruments! I hope there are more moments like this in the music! I agree with Jason's point here since I find the texture abrupt too. I hope the semiquaver motions will be retained here, instead of the sudden dotted rhythm!! I also agree with Jason in terms of flute's register. If it's written for flute I really wish it can play with its unique high register, but since it's originally written brass it's fine for me. I see that in most of the variations the method use is metre change and expansion. I enjoy this varying element, but I wish there are more elements too! The texture doesn't change much for me, since it's usually flute playing the melody, clarinet filling in the gap and bassoon playing the bass accompaniment. I really enjoy the fugue and moments like b.82 when clarinet plays the melody instead of the flute! And I hope some variations can use bassoon as the main melodic instrument to feature its low register and the melody in its low range! Also, the texture doesn't change much in the variations. Almost all the variations use imitation for flue and clarinet. I wish one or two variations will feature one of them as solo instead of being twins all the time!! Personally I think they imitate too much, and would like to have variations when flute or clarinet play the melody, and the other two playing the accompaniment. That will shows the colour of the instrument more!! I really enjoy this one, as @Left Unexplained noted, full of life and fun for me, despite saying these nitpicky things!! Thanks so much for sharing, Peter! Henry

Thanks for such imagery you use to describe my music! I'd say that's pretty inspired too! LoL I'm glad you enjoyed it.

Thank you for your comment!😭, I really apreciate that. I'm not a pianist, my main instrument is viola haha. In the reexposure I though that the pianist should find the most confortable way but I struggled writing that part because I wanted to do the same hand movement but I didn't find a better option.

Yeah, so there are two reasons why I did this. 1. I wanted a lower ensemble because I thought it would give it a darker sound. Really, I think it just made it muddy lol. 2. I didn't know there was a standard string arrangement, but I was 14 when I wrote most of this, so I didn't really know much about that yet. I agree, I hadn't really thought about performers getting tired at the time. Thank you. I definitely think real string would have more clarity, but I still think it would be too muddy.

Very interesting musical ideas here. I like the energy behind your writing. That said, I'm noticing some issues here and there. First, some of your double stops on violin (and the viola in the orchestral rendition you posted) are nearly impossible to play. 4th movement, measure 13 for instance. Third position (III) would make this somewhat doable -but there'd definitely be a high risk of intonation issues due to the awkwardness of the fingering needed here. The double stops mm 11 and 12 also are difficult due to the fact you have the violinst in 5th position. Cpincidentally, the bowing here would make the accent on the first beat of bar 11 impossible. If you want that all bowed, then I'd recommend you crescendo that passage to bring out that first double stop. Measure 31, the double stop here doesn't quite make sense -it's doable, but I'm wondering if that's a wrong note. Bowing at measure 47 is going to make the accent on bar 48 nearly impossible... particularly with the held trill afterwards. I'd look at redoing this passage. Keep in mind with your slurs that string players -while they can adjust the speed of the bow while applying pressure to sustain dynamics- only have so much bow available to use!

I have a few ideas for the ending. For me, the transition from the restatement of the opening material could is what I'm looking at as well as the end material. Doesn't quite seem cohesive to me. I'll tinker with it. Glad you enjoyed it though!

Hi. Just like that guy above, I don't own my own yard but I'll keep your words in mind. I also agree with Henry of the playability on the piano reduction. • The piece is modest in its range as well as you say its difficulty is, and in this case I like it that way, as every work doesn't need to be bombastic nor extreme at all. Still, it felt pretty static to me, perhaps because of the already pointed abundance of parallel phrases, and some abrupt silences (one at the beginning of the piece for example). It would be really nice if you managed to do an actual performance of this. This way we could see the piece at its full expression, but obviously we all know here that it's kinda difficult to get your pieces performed. • While I get some dissonances and the reason behind certain decisions since you already commented them, I expected some tension release on, e.g: M29-33 because of the lyrics and as a contrast with the preceding section. Kind regards, Daniel–Ømicrón.

Thanks! I listened again paying special attention to these timestamps and I do hear the ones at 3:19, 6:09, 6:46, 6:59 but not the others. But since some of these are definitely objectively a flaw in the recording my only guess is that my computer did it when it was rendering the mp3. I am used to these kinds of imperfections happening all the time if I use the playback feature in Musescore 4 with Musesounds. But I usually expect that to be smoothed out and rendered ideally when the computer has as much time as it needs to create an mp3 rather than playing back in real-time. Maybe I could try re-rendering it again. I guess part of the reason I did this is to keep the listener aware of the fact that they're hearing the same material over and over, and yet, it's surprisingly different each time. This juxtaposition between the new and the familiar is what I think attracts me to the variations form. But I don't think I'd like it so much if the listener lost track at some point in the variations process of how the material is related to the original theme. And I know you're already aware that the flute isn't always the melody but I thought I'd just mention the exceptions to this here: in II - the Minuet, the Clarinet has the melody until the last recapitulation of the melody in meas. 59 which is taken over by flute; in III - the March, the Clarinet engages in canonic imitation with the Flute taking over the melody for a bar here and there; in VI - the 2nd Minuet, the Clarinet also leads with the melody until the Flute takes it over in meas. 139; in VII - the Scherzo, at meas. 173 the Clarinet takes over the melody from the Flute. I do write for the flute pretty high! Up to a high Eb above the staff which proved too high for Musesounds Trumpet patch which is why I switched the instruments. I don't see how I could have done that since I wrote the whole piece for brass and finished it before I went to the computer and started inputting the piece, only to find out that Musescore won't playback my material as intended because of range issues (which shouldn't have been a problem imo). The whole thing was finished before I had to decide to switch to woodwinds, so I couldn't have been disappointed by that when writing it! LoL Thanks! I'm glad you enjoyed it and your gripes just highlight the fact that no piece is perfect and especially one like this that was originally written for a different ensemble and hence is not presented in it's ideal form. @jawoodruff didn't know what a Lilt was either. That's because I made it up. LoL Thanks! I personally didn't like the ending myself, I think Musesounds playback can sometimes lack force and hence finality. Or it could just be my writing - but I did try to create a crescendo to fff at the end and it still wasn't enough ... oof That's music to my ears! Literally! LoL Seriously, I'm greatly indebted to you for your high appraisal of my music and the time you take to give your reviews. This must be the longest review I've seen of anyones music here recently! It's rare that a music hobbyist like myself can find people who appreciate them during their lifetime! Now I'm gonna go sit at my old computer and try to dig some old compositions out from oblivion and finish. Thanks for your review!