Leaderboard

I made this very small renaissance motet for 4 voices, Cantus, Altus, Tenor and Bassus. However my stupid brain wrote the text wrong and instead of "Sicut LILIUM" it became "Sicut ILIUM", I only noticed it after finishing the motet! But besides that part everything is in accordance to what it should be. Enjoy! Text: Sicut [l]ilium inter spinas Sic amica mea inter filias

Symphony-Concerto In A Major For Electric Guitar And Orchestra-1 Free Sheet Music by Robert C. Fox for Various Instruments | Noteflight Symphony-Concerto In A Major For Electric Guitar And Orchestra-2 Free Sheet Music by Robert C. Fox for Various Instruments | Noteflight Symphony-Concerto In A Major For Electric Guitar And Orchestra-3 Free Sheet Music by Robert C. Fox for Various Instruments | Noteflight Symphony-Concerto In A Major For Electric Guitar And Orchestra-4 Free Sheet Music by Robert C. Fox for Various Instruments | Noteflight

Greetings @Wieland Handke! The F-natural in bars 3 and 4 of the 1st and 2nd entry is very much intentional, even though it does generate a certain degree of instability not present in the original, fully tonal rendition of Mozart's own canon. In fact, I should thank you for highlighting the matter of accidentals, as the previous version did not, in fact, feature completely real transpositions of the theme. There were a handful of mistakes every 3rd bar, not contrapuntal, but harmonic and thematic, as the continuity and integrity of the transpositions was broken with leading tone and its minor 3rd/5th of a dominant chord being raised a semitone higher. All of that has now been corrected, so unless any more oversights of mine were to resurface, every single entry should now be a real transposition to the lower major 2nd of the main 18-bar-long subject. I'm glad to learn that the current length of this canon would prevent it from seeming far too repetitive to the eyes of an educated listener. Indeed, I was worried it might end up sounding excessively mechanical despite the flowing timbre of legato strings, as monotony may distort even the most sophisticated of musical devices into pure pure noise after far too many identical, tiresome reiterations. It's a relief to know that to you it did not appear to be the case here, and I must thank you for your acute observations, for otherwise I might not have come to realize that the transpositions were not 100% exact. I should also probably check @PeterthePapercomPoser's take on the Persichetti exercises, especially considering this canon on different scales you just mentioned. I'm anticipating a gold mine of modal/post-tonal contrapuntal solutions! Thank you for this recommendation as well.

Oh that's a difficult question about the differences and preferences between the two versions! For the first impression, they sound similar. And that is not meant as superficial impression, but rather I'm all the more amazed at how these three different scales retain their personality while now acting together (or against each other) in a different distance and relation. Maybe the tertian variant is more melancholic and serene, while the quartal one has a more excited character. This impression might be emphasized by the fact that the three voices are now narrower together in the tertian version and the sopranino clarinet does not play in such a high register and is less shrill. (By the way, I like that you’ve used three instruments with different registers, so that the voices are clearly separated, despite the somewhat annoying sound.)

Hallo @Fugax Contrapunctus! I’m astonished how it works to create such a harmonically balanced piece while stepping down a whole note for each subsequent voice entry! Since @PeterthePapercomPoser also presented a canon based on different scales in one of his recent Persichetti exercises, I would like to know if you transposed some of the canon imitations into other modes or scales to achieve this harmonic consistency? I didn't check it out thoroughly, as I initially thought you had changed from minor to major to minor in the first three entries, without noticing that there is no F# in violin 2 in bar 4. No, the three entries are identical. But now, I think I’ve probably figured out the trick: The theme starts on the lydian fourth, F# in the theme being in C major – at least for the first four bars. However, a few bars later the melody starts to descend to the flats handing over the harmonic center to the next voice. So the descent is inherent in the melody which might be a bit difficult to learn due to its harmonic instability. While being heavily repetitive by its nature, the entire canon is not boring – at least not at this length. If being part of a larger work, such as an oratorio, I could imagine that it would be contrasted by a more declarative and stable section.

Yeah. It is also tremendously difficult... Let's say two guitarists somehow managed to premiere it by playing the main part together.

The really! How? Is how someone would actually perform this...😦

Firstly, You combine the symphony and the concerto, and the you add an electrical guitar. wow. i am IMPRESSED. (really! How?)

just checked this out and damn the orchestration rocks. Keeps that cute vibe from the original but makes it way bigger and emotional. Solid work!

MP3 Play / pause DDLC Your Reality FINAL 0:00 0:00 volume > next menu DDLC Your Reality FINAL > next PDF Your Reality just checked this out and damn the orchestration rocks. Keeps that cute vibe from the original but makes it way bigger and emotional. Solid work!

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!

38 years or so, this was 1997!

This sounds really nice. How long have you been composing scores (just curious)?

You call the first theme folk melody...that's a compliment; I thought of it as a fugue subject in disguise! There are romantic-era nods as well. In the first movement, the slow intro sounds a bit like Tchaikovsky, and the final cadence is a direct rip-off (well, tribute to?) of the final cadence to C.M.V. Weber's Der Freischütz first act! Different key. It has always been my favorite opera!😉 It is not postmodern, but could that be true in a way? Basically a Nineteenth Century symphony, but has Baroque elements, even some Classical ones. We LIVING composers have the luxury, especially today with everything on the Internet, to be eclectic.

I saw the viola in the bass clef thing; just a Noteflight glitch, it likes to change things! It was on a measure rest so didn't make a difference in the sound, but of course I corrected it!

A lot of voice leading things that are weird. Very postmodern sounding to. I somewhat appreciate the dissonance. OK, I like the change to pace. I appreciate the different folk aspects of this piece. And I definitely like that electric guitar cadenza. A mixing issue with the winds burying the main theme. We are back at measure 59 with the folk melody There may be some difficulty at 83 and before that with the double tongue in the brass. I also like how some of the other instruments double the guitar with the runs. Why is the viola in the bass clef. I like the rhythmic interpretation and variation around 111. I enjoy the guitar solo and also the irregular variation with the rhythm although that the playback may not support this make sure you write some slurring around. At 179 a previous theme returns. Along with the folk melody running after that. Some of the guitar material had returned. And I like the end. Good job and I appreciate the amazing structure and the cool material that you have given throughout the first Movement

scraggy!!!🤣

One more thing orchestral I can post, an opera overture from 1995. If I enter any of the opera, probably extract a suite or something if I don't feel like working myself to death! Overture to the Opera Hypochondria Free Sheet Music by Robert C. Fox for Various Instruments | Noteflight

Comment retracted...

No; two weeks ago: how time flies!

Chew on this, until I get an actual reply: Waltz in A Major Free Sheet Music by Robert C. Fox for Piano/Keyboard | Noteflight I simply LOVE A Major! And this was written a week ago or so, not in 1997-1998 like the symphony.

At least this site seems to be at least alive; a moderator seems to have removed my clumsy double-post, and I have a follower after 20 minutes! Glad you like my one and only symphony; too much work, I prefer chamber music, songs, piano pieces, etc...

Well, I'm 56 and not a young composer now, but I was 28-29 when I wrote this beast...