Leaderboard

Sir Pickles of Mercury hereby declares his entrance into the Grand Competition. (also: happy five years on the forum to me!!!!)

Hi! Long time for not posting anything! I'm revising my old Clarinet Quintet and learning orchestration in the process. Here's something I'm working on. Clarinet Quintet in C minor is a work I finished 4 years ago in 2022 which I accidentally began my revision of it in April 2026. It's a work in four movements and in it I want to share my feeling towards despair, dream and hope. The piece is dedicated to my friend Ms. Merina Fung. Speical Thanks to @Thatguy v2.0 for making the audio for me. Here is the youtube video of the movement: Here is the structure of the 1st movement: 00:00 1st subject, Exposition. Introduce the "despair" motive (0134), in some sort of sad waltz in C minor. The passage in 01:26 is directly copied from an old piece of mine named "Boredom" 01:48 Transition. Follow the tonal plan of the first movement of Tchaikovsky's Fourth Symphony and modulate to tritone major Gb major (which is the tonic key of my next major work, String Sextet in G flat major). 04:09 2nd subject, Exposition. Introduce the "dream motive" (0247) and subsidary chromatic motive of (0123). Conflicts of the despair and dream motives continue, the dream seems to win at 06:53 with its own climax but easily defeated with a bold C minor half cadence right before the close of the exposition with a forceful perfect cadence in Gb. 08:42 Development, part 1. The dream breaks expectedly I really like the counterpoint in 08:59. Modulates to E minor for the transition theme, then build to a really beautiful climax in E major in 11:10 which I really love. Makes this movement sounds a bit less tragic. 11:36 Development, part 2. Another false serenity after the beautiful climax by a disappointed passage in G# minor in 12:38. The serene texture returns in B major in 13:17 but falls short to a dominant preparation of C minor in 13:50. I really love the retransition as it sounds really passionate to me (Actually I love all parts of the remianing parts in this movement after this point). A review of the keys visited in 14:27 with an octatonic falling scale, ending with two sorrowful monologue of clarinet and cello, just like the beginning. 14:53 Transition. I skip the 1st subject reappearence in the recap as it's completely meaningless to do so, given how the motive is developed in the entire movement. I really love the tragedy here, as I even have this passage reappears in the coda of 4th movement, after 40 minutes or so lol. Another false serenity in tonic major in 15:24, and I really love the nostalgic sounding passage in Ab major in 16:01, still base on the dream motive. The German sixth chord in 16:36 must be stolen from Schubert"s Quartettsatz. A fugato in 16:42 trying to fight despair and reclaim dream once more and "sucessfully" modulates to Gb major once again. 17:31 2nd subject, Recap. But when you want more you hurt more, as despair harms you more when you have hope. This time a hard C minor half cadence comes. The dream theme now becomes a nightmare in 18:07 and continues to sigh. 19:20 Coda. Previous themes keep reappearing as I myself used to ruminate my sadness all the time. Finally it ends with what begins the piece, the realization of despair in its original form. Structurally I am not really satisfied with how I expand the themes in the 2nd subject of exposition (Dream part) and how I treat the materials in development, as I am afraid I overextend too much. However I just retain most of the things originally as I wanna keep true to my old self. It's an absolute low when I composed this piece, as I really questioned myself whether I could really compose something good back then. Luckily I did finish the entire work and gave me some confidence, plus meeting some really good friends here. The whole 4 movement piece is composed with three motives mentioned above, as I wanted to keep the piece coherent. The inspiration of the work comes from Brahms’s Clarinet Quintet as I wanted to write a more tragic piece than his (of course this goal fails), but I am happy with what I’ve done. Strangely only now do I find how Brahmsian this piece is. One interesting thing is that despite the movement is in C minor, in the first 14 minutes (two-thirds) of the movement, only 2 minutes are in the tonic. In this revision I mainly modify spots I find unreasonble, some voicings and slurs, and breathing spots for Clarinet. Hope you listen through the music and read through the description, and my wish that enjoy the work! Feel free criticize the work as I know it's far from perfect. P.S. the old version of this same Quintet is posted before: It's my biggest mistake to post an hour long piece here as my first post. So I will chop up the 4 movements and post it one by one now! Henry Clarinet Quintet in C minor 1st mov V3.mp3 (For YT)Clarinet Quintet in C minor 1st mov final 20260501.pdf

@Colenbacher Hello I understand your question very well. And I also understand that the answers aren't exactly what you're looking for. Although I agree with them as well. I believe that rather than learning harmony from the Romantic period, what matters is learning the compositional techniques that the composers of this period introduced and used (not just in terms of harmony). It’s absolutely true that to understand this, you need to start by knowing what happened in earlier periods, at least from the Baroque through the Style Galant and Classicism. Because many Romantic techniques are reinventions (“recycled”) of all those earlier styles. I don’t think you’ll find specific sections on Romantic harmony in general treatises and books. I’ve had that curiosity, and interest as well. But I studied the Baroque and the Galant period quite extensively, above all. I even started much earlier with the cantus firmus. And that historical and chronological perspective has helped me immensely in understanding even contemporary music. With this, you’ll see that everything is a continuum; even periods that broke quite sharply with what came before (Impressionism, dodecaphonism) are the result of an evolution. So, just as I did with other periods, I sought out the sources myself and compiled a lot of information on this topic on my blog. First, I provided a general overview, which I’ve transcribed here, and then I analyzed techniques such as augmented chords and modulation, secondary subdominants, dominant chains, chromatic thirds, (traditional) linear techniques, irregular resolutions, and so on. Not to mention that Romanticism is a vast genre and that each composer, moreover, has their own peculiarities. Brahms has nothing in common with Chopin. And let’s not even get started on late Romanticism. Some words from my blog: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ROMANTIC PERIOD *New forms: symphonic poem, song cycle, music drama, *Study of the folk-heritage in music and imitation of folk-like melodic simplicity, *Predilection for exotic effects through employment of foreign national coloring or the folkloristic heritage (Chopin, Tchaikovsky, the Russians) [Chopin's more than 50 mazurkas represent one of the earliest examples of overt nationalistic sentiments in music], *Break-up of stylistic unity but more individualism, *Higher interest in melody and color rather than harmony and form, longer melodies *Higher dissonances and a freer employment of them, * More use of dynamics and articulations, * Rubato, *A more innovative treatment of chromatic harmony, *Extensive use of diminished seventh chords, *Modulation to distant tonalities, *Use of relations by thirds, *Greater interest in modal techniques (flat seventh [common to many modes], flat second [Phrygian], augmented fourth [Lydian]), *Assimilation of older elements, especially the revival of polyphony and Baroque forms under the influence of JS Bach [Mendelssohn, Brahms], *Thematicism plays a more important role in a sonata movement than tonality, *Thematic metamorphosis: A programmatic approach to composition often associated thematic material with a character or idea. Changing circumstances or emotional states were represented by the transformation of the thematic material (as in Faust Symphony or Symphony Fantastique), *Cell development technique in nationalist music, (music cell = small and melodioc design that can be isolated) *Use of a cyclic device: Material from one movement recurs in another (a technique related to thematic metamorphosis, idee fixe and leitmotive) (Serenade for Strings by Tchaikovsky; Mendelssohn's Eb string quartet; Beethoven's Symphony No.9), *Manipulation of sonata form, including mosaic and additive structures. More organic treatment of the form, *Postludes in the Lieder (especially by Schumann), *Unity on a large scale: merging of separate movements into a single span (Liszt's Sonata in B minor), larger instrumentations, *Finishing a minor mode piece in major (from darkness to light): Egmont overture, Symphony No.5 & 9 , Piano Sonatas Opp.90 & 111, and the second act of Fidelio by Beethoven; Schumann's Fourth Symphony; Franck's Symphony in D minor; Brahms' s First Symphony. *Intense energy and passion, dramatic opera,

Having read the program notes page, I think you capture the atmosphere of some of the themes (ie. betrayal, turbulence) you mentioned. It would be interesting to hear the rest of the soundtrack to see how the themes/motifs you have here develop. Though, I gotta be honest...film scores lately have a very generic sound to them and this (for me anyways) falls in that category. Some things musical things from the score I noticed: The way these harmonics are notated is confusing. I'm saying that as a string player. Some 2nd violinists might think you want an open E string, which I'm pretty sure you don't want. If these are actual sounding pitches, the 1st violinist would have an easier time understanding these notations (one is a natural harmonic, the other is an artificial....don't really have a preference): The 2nd violin note (if that is the sounding pitch) is impossible to play as a harmonic on a violin. As I said, players would probably play an open E string. The viola one looks alright, it'll be a natural harmonic on the G string. Saw this in the score a couple of times. Wondering if you could move the pp before the barline to avoid those awkward looking measures with rests. Overall, there seems to be over-reliance on doublings between instrument groups. E to the end is the prime example. I think most of the wind/brass instruments can drop out at 47 for a quieter ending. Also that section felt a little...static? Could use some more rhythmic drive (maybe bring back the bass guitar/cello figure from the beginning?) or just some counterpoint.

[INFO DUMP] I am not sure if I would go with the term "a lot" when it comes to the midi-playback discrepancy. It can be wonderous to hear our music realized in the notation engine; and at the same time, two things can be true at once. Hearing it in the computer is not the same as hearing it live. Just because the computer can do it, does not mean it will have the same effect with an orchestra or if it will be played correctly by an ensemble as the computer has shown. (People have done comparison videos showing Musescore Audio engine vs. a real orchestra. You can hear the results and form your opinions.) It's why we inform ourselves on the properties of instruments and why we study instrument pairings so we have the best tools at our disposal for effective writing. _______________ Ironically, to ask "How do I write better?" is a subjective question and the only answer will be what is great/ good to you. In the literal sense, if you feel you are inefficient or that your music is not accomplishing the standards you want, then there in itself is some knowledge dissonance and it may be your writing process that hinders you. There are a few ways to do this, and asking these questions is more than okay (especially here!). Igor Stravinsky was quoted saying the following: "Good composers borrow, Great ones steal" It is a variation of a phrase both Picasso and T.S. Eliot used when describing their work. One way to learn is to look at the greats, or your composer ancestors. Look at their music and copy it by hand, or by mouse. See where they put the notes and see what instruments... then look at the results. Since you have some music theory training, analyze the harmony and see how they voiced a chord, etc! Try re-orchestrating something if you want; or come up with your own exercises. In the collegiate sphere, at an early point, we were given Bach harmonic progressions and had to write a melody on top in my undergrad. That was a few years ago. Speaking of, do understand that you won't become Wagner overnight. This will take time and that is okay. _______________ If you haven't already learned, most big composers did not compose for a large ensemble first. They composed for a reduced score, as in a simple grand staff for a piano, and wrote out the entire piece first BEFORE orchestrating it. Did you know Gustav Holst wrote The Planets for Two Pianos in 1914, FOUR years before the premiere? He wrote it for keyboard first and then orchestrated the famous work we know today. Starting small and being able to see all the pieces over 2-3 staves is a lot easier than trying to control 17+ staves at your first go. Thus, if you haven't, give this a try!

Hello Have you heard of this virtual instrument called CANTAI? Please note: I have no affiliation with these programmes, even though I use them. https://cantai.app/ It’s a virtual instrument for voices and choirs. It works with MuseScore (which is more advanced), Dorico (the official version was released a couple of days ago) and Sibelius. The novelty is that you write the score, add the parts (soprano, alto, tenor, bass, choir) and write the lyrics... And once everything is set up, the result is that it ‘sings’. I use it with Dorico. It still needs improving, because although it interprets dynamics and accents, and there are many voices available, there will be more. At the moment, in Dorico you can write in English and Latin. But Chinese and Spanish are already available in MuseScore (I think). I’ve written this little sample song to see how it works.

[INFO DUMP pt.2] Unfortunately this scenario is only hypothetical and will stay hypothetical. To be as blunt as possible, there is flaw in the logic. So far, no one I have seen on the forums or any of your uploads have critiqued the raw music. It has been often aimed on the presentation of the music and in this case, about the sheet music. Having music performed is a competitive goal. 100s-1000s of people submit works every year for performance opportunities, both in the educational and professional scene. Speaking from my own experience, all the opportunities I have applied for have asked for a Resume and portfolio. Even if you have "the best work" from an subjective standpoint, they will go with the more experienced person in the professional scene and in the educational realm, they are more likely to give more chances to newer composers. I have made over 20 original pieces that I personally say are perfect and several arrangements. Most of my pieces are for the orchestra, and in my notation engine... I have over 100 files worth of scores. Out of all my music, I've been given the chance to have only four of my pieces performed, three of which were by me. I cannot understate how hard it is to get music performed for large ensembles. Yes, I know a lot and can guide a lot of musicians, but I am just another dude who does not have a big portfolio. I have to start small and work my way up. If a producer asks if you have a portfolio, this indirectly will show if you have had music performed, NOT just if it was made. I can draw a stickman but I do not call myself Monet or Dali. Just because you made a song or two is great, yet, how much experience do you have hearing your music live? If you haven't... then how often are you participating in the music community? Have you worked with other conductors, professors, soloists and varying ensembles? To tie back into the forum, we only want to see others succeed. This is why I share such detailed analysis of varying scores. It may be the one encounter that opens a new door in their thinking, or help provide an expectation of scores in the community. This is why I comment now. None of it is personal, at least coming from me. If you wish to talk about score engraving, then I'd be willing. It's a different ballgame compared to the music creation.

Hi Bioplar, The choice of instrument for this composition, certainty, was correct. Harp, Bassoon, and Oboe do create the tonal colors for a pastoral piece. You could have choose any wood wind instrument, for they soft, warm colors. When I hear the harp, I envision mermaid playing on rock. (that is just me) The woods, I think, create dreamy aura in this piece. I enjoy interplay oboe and bassoon with the harp. Overall...nice job

I see, that helps a lot! In the orchestration example you provide, there is something lacking in terms of the ensemble tessitura. Tessitura is a complex word, but in simple terms describes the characters/ properties of an instruments range. (I.e Flutes sounds airy/ whispery when played low, Tubas sound rich when played high, etc.) In this context, I am worried about where the notes are placed in the instruments and then comparing that to the harmonic series. If you wanted a full sound from the orchestra, you need to fill out the harmonic series so we hear all the resonances. The computer (MuseScore in this case) is deceiving you because you are hearing a lot of instruments, but if this were played live, it would sound loud, but not as rich/ warm as you want it to. FEEDBACK: Brass - The horns doubling the same pitch will not sound "full" but the same brassy sound louder. Ensemble Tutti - There can be different variants of an ensemble tutti. The most basic being every instrument is playing the exact same line in their registers. However, another implication is that every instrument is playing, albeit, different material. This is more reminiscent to your example and I think it fitting if you have the bass instruments (Contrabasses, Contrabassoons) sustain the pedal/ tonic fundamental. If every line is moving, then it is hard to hear the melodic content you want. Pulsing the harmony and grounding the bass while the melodic line moves will be an effective tool to clearly hear the feature. Timpani - BEWARREEEEE the timpani. While written in bass clef, it is NOT a bass instrument. Remind yourself that the timpani has anywhere between 1-5 drums (5 for professional ensembles and 4 for universal standard) It has a hard time moving stepwise and if you can write leaps or intervals bigger than a 3rd, it will be very easy on the player. They can tune the drum heads live and if you are not too sure if it is playable, ask a timpanist for insight. Also, for a point of the score, make sure your language is standard. You mixed english names and italian names for the instruments. Make it easy on the brain and keep it one or the other lol Attached is a sample orchestration of what I have done with these comments. I changed the harmony a little to make it simpler for example purposes only: (I just realized I missed the Divisi for the Celli.. whoops) Orch.Sample_Audio.mp3 Orchestration Sample.pdf

Hello, Little fugue i wrote today in the north german baroque style. First musical output in years. Simple in harmony, joyful and melodic in theme and counterpoint. Scored for four voices, work well enough with organ or strings. Fuga in g.mp3 Fuga in G.pdf

Hi! Actually I just completed my piano toccata piece inspired from living near the motor city (Detroit, MI) in my childhood... I decided to make this toccata piece since I thought the mechanistic characteristics of the genre match well with general images of the motor city... In this piece I tried to express free style of lots of jazz and popular music heard when I was growing up near Detroit, while keeping this piece modern classical music... Hope you enjoy this piece, and please feel free to leave any comments and suggestions :) Motorcity Toccata.mp3 Motorcity Toccata.pdf

I see! Feel free, yeah. Trying to maintain a certain balance between number of posts & number of replies is a wise choice. In my experience, uploading too much and replying too little leads to being ignored because others fairly see you as someone that only wants a bit of attention and that doesn't really care about anything else. It's a valid stance, but it leads to rejection. That said, I encourage you to keep posting & interacting here. I'll make sure to check your No. 8 whenever I find a bit of free time! Regarding this: do you use a software to make these pieces that doesn't provide a solid PDF output overall? Regards!

Sometimes it's not about your skills, it's more about whether the judges' taste is similar with yours and your work's skill level can still be very high even if they think it's not good enough to advance to the next round. I think of winning any prizes more like a chance event, just like having job interviews haha. Keep going and you will for sure pursue what you want! Henry

Melodies Themes Motives Harmony Chords Textures Form Development Structure Time Originality Creativity Score Presentation Instrumentation Orchestration Playability Execution of Given Challenge Taste 4 8 2 10 3 8 2 9 Average Score: 5.75 I'm not one to enjoy being critical, too harshly of anyone's original music, as most of the time, music is subjective and taken in based on individual opinion and preference, but from a professional stand point, this score is quite difficult to follow. I'd also note that the terms of the competition stated; "3 - 5 monophonic or polyphonic instruments/voices." {most of the Instrumentation choices here are neither mono / polyphonic in nature, and there are far too many of them.. lol} While I understand your intent, in your use of braces (which you used grand staff brackets rather than part brackets, but I understand, nonetheless lol), for a section representing 1 performer, it's simply not within the constraints of the rules of the competition. I went ahead and graded it as I would any other score, however, to provide you with some level of feedback on the writing done here. I did not want to neglect it, artistically. As you can see, I highly favor the Originality, the Textures, and your taste within the given score, however, the piece itself is very "through-composed" without much rhyme or reason that's easily discernible... Meaning, I don't hear a motif that catches my attention; a home for me to reference back to again, to keep my ear on-track with the music. For that reason, I felt a 2 was appropriate for the form/development section, as well as the 4 in the Melodies, Themes, and Motives. (Slightly higher because of the intricacies in melodic components with the few polyphonic instruments you do have in use for this score.) Ultimately, I feel that this score should not be considered as a valid entry, simply based on the number of staves you've used here, despite the constraints, but I will always have respect for anything that anyone has taken their time and effort to work on, and this piece, in and of itself, has the potential to be much greater than it is, currently, I think. - Uncle Red

Lithl - Swarm of Sound I would appreciate any kind of feedback, whether it’s a critique or just your overall impressions of the work. Thank you.

Hi Sera, welcome to the forums! Just as an advice, many of us like to read the sheet music in case there's any. Maybe it's not the case here? Did you use a DAW to make this directly in MIDI + VSTs? Hmmm. Still in the first mp3 you attached. I guess I should read these criticisms more in depth in order to see how much I would agree or disagree with them. Often, the definitions of what X or Y are depend widely on the person using them. I would be inclined to think that when somebody told you that there's "no melody" they tried to convey something a bit deeper than "there's absence of a melodic line". Maybe they themselves don't even know how any better way to tell you their thoughts, but again I am not sure since I did not read these comments myself. There's obviously a melody in the sense there's an horizontal line in the piano (and later, on the strings) that's intentionally put on top of the rest of the sound mix, and there is some motive repeating here and there but it is shadowed by the —I would say, evident— vertical design of the piece in one hand, and also by the repetitive nature of the piece itself, a repetition that does not rely on the melody but that is commanded by that vertical design. The block-ish simple 4-chord progression/wheel harmony (Em G Bm D, with ocassional variations G-> Am, Bm-> Eb), to me and in this very case, competes against the melody here, and successfully (to some of your critics disgrace) robs a good chunk of its prominence. Adding variations and ostinatos on top of or next to said melodic line does not help. On top of that, the dynamics that are not built by layering instruments/voices are in my opinion either very subtle or inexistent. All in all, I can get people saying: "there's no melody" as an oversimplification of "this piece lacks a strong melodic line leading it". In fact, the harmony itself leads (or restricts) the melody. As much as there's rhytmic movement in the upper voice in the piano, it always stays inside of each bar. The piece barely moves from that so what the brain ultimately gets is "| Things | Things | Things | Things |". The melody is not on top of that, but constrained to that rigid sub-structure. Your alternative three "melodies" suffer from that. You build vertically, vertical sub-structure commands over horizontal movements, and thus the melody you build doesn't escape and get the prominence it needs to be righteously called a "melody". This does not mean that any piece with these characteristics will have no distinguishable melody, but that this happens in this particular case. Let's stop a bit at the "it's just tinkling", I would not say that but I kind of get where this may come from too. Keeping in mind what I discussed in last paragraph, if you combine "melodic line not leading", "ostinatos & small variations" and we consider that the piano resorts to it's high register in order to make that melodic line more prominent, we get something that we could indeed call "piano tinkle". I would say it can be cantabile, but it can also feel easily forgettable because it again gets diluted by the things I have been pointing out in this message. But wait a minute: do you intend this piece to have a prominent melodic line to begin with? After 3-4 listenings, it strikes me as a piece with (strong?) influence of the style of L. Einaudi (and the likes) . I'm not a fan, but it's yet another way to build music and it doesn't neccesarily rely on a melodic line to move things forward. For certain purposes, you don't even want things to "move forward". You may want to create an "atmosphere", or simply something whose main source of movement &/or development is not concentrated in the melody. You do you. Finally: it doesn't strike me as a Ballade but I'm not sure if there's a clear defintion of that so no big deal. Did you yourself think: "I want to make a piece with a clear, distinguishable melody."? Just curious. Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

I’m excited to share my new piece: Sonata No. 23 in F-sharp major, written in binary form. It’s a charming and playful work, full of unexpected harmonic twists that give it a unique and stylish character—perhaps the most distinctive sonata I’ve written so far. I composed this piece in just a few hours spread over two days, making the creative process as spontaneous as the music itself. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did writing it—let me know what you think in the comments!

I'm impressed both by your light touch playing this, and the lack of scratching out on your handwritten copy. If I wrote that way, it would be all chaotic scribbled out former ideas. The interplay between your first and second sections works very well! A very satisfying piece to listen to!

Not normally, no. They are standard in our industry. The only time it would be broken is when you have a larger ensemble or other instrument combinations that are not standard. In this case, it’s not about orchestral order, it’s about highest-> lowest instrument for the layout.

Hello! It is time. As you asked, I have delivered. Attached on this comment are my annotations on the arrangement thus far. Directly under, I have attached a sample PDF and sample Audio file to pair with my notes. The notes are found at the end of the current score and if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask! Kvothe - Reger Humoresque (ANNOTATED).pdf Attached Files: Kvothe_Example.pdf Kvothe_ExampleAudio.mp3

Hi all, it's been a really long time, I decided I wanted to come back and check out what's going on! I also wanted to share two successes of mine in the past several months: Slipping, which was written in early-2025, written for Symphonic Orchestra, was performed by the California Youth Symphony in November 2025. I have attached the score and two recordings of it, one MIDI and one of the performance. The Dunning-Kruger Effect, written in mid-2025, written for String Orchestra, was performed by my school orchestra, which I conducted. I have attached the score and here's the video: https://youtu.be/CQBDUVbKEpQ?si=psCVro_MLM3NfmEV . Looking forward to seeing what's going on in this forum after so long! Slipping.mp3 Slipping FINAL MIDI.mp3 Slipping-score.pdf the dunning-kruger effect score.pdf

Thanks for listening luderart, glad you enjoyed it :) Hey Kvothe, thanks for listening! Regarding your point #1, yeah you're correct, it was more for playback. @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu was kind enough to record it, I could just write con pedale or something now 🙂

Dear all. I am glad to share with you the final movement of my Symphony No.1! This is the official conclusion of my whole set of Symphony No.1! I can't believe it is done after few years. Hope you all enjoy it! About the work As usual, the highly motivic and related to other movements. The third three notes "dat-dat dat!" serves the main motive (and new material) of this movement. As an answer, the motive from First movement (blue) is immediately recalled with little modiciation in rhythm. The second mvt. motive (green) also enter the party very soon. The work reaches the climax at m.244 from the build up of m.193 which goes into a very big bright chord. The last part of the work starts are m.274 and ended with a crash of different motives.

Thank you for your kind comments! You are not the first one who recall Bartok while listening my works - I guess it is because of the crude dissonance. I mainly write on computer as it gives me immediate playback which makes my writing more convenient. It is important the method of writing follows the speed my idea comes! haha. It also make the engraving easier. Here is the full set of my Symphony No.1: Symphony No.1 - First Movement - Orchestral and Large Ensemble - Young Composers Music Forum Symphony No.1 - Second Movement - Orchestral and Large Ensemble - Young Composers Music Forum Symphony No.1 - Finale - Orchestral and Large Ensemble - Young Composers Music Forum

I want to join the competition, but I'm not sure if I'll make it.

[INFO DUMP] Kvothe has merit in their critique. There are plenty of truths about music and the most basic one is that this art is here for you to enjoy. Whether it is by music creation, performance or listening to a song, it is here for all humans to express and interact with. This said, we live a society, and there are rules, expectations and trends for us to follow. In the music industry, this is very much true. Most of us here are professionals in the classical/ traditional aspect of music creation and performance, while some focus on more modern productions and performances on the popular stage. When it comes to the idea of having your work performed, the first and most basic universal is to have sheet music ready for musicians to perform. Sure, a studio or individual can only use the MP3 render and call it a day, however, that may not work for all cases. You may hire a band or an orchestra to play the music, however, they too will expect some PDF or printed copy to use. No matter the means, if you truly wish to participate in this field, you must inform yourself on the current practices. Why? Because there is an expectation and standard for music distribution. One aspect often overlooked is the side of copyright and trademark protection. If you have a work performed or licensed, you need to have this protection for widespread use. If you publish the score, it must also be protected. Just because "you made it" doesn't always guarantee it is protected. To tie back in, this is the fundamental point of Kvothe's comments. You cannot just throw a score out into the community and expect everyone to respect it like they would a Mozart work. There are professional expectations in engraving, formatting and document layout. So much so, people may disregard your score if you misspelled an instrument part. Sheet music distribution is under a lot of scrutiny and please do not take any comments about it personally. We are all spoiled by good sheet music and to be fair, we expect to see it... especially if we have to spend money for a copy.

Several months ago, I posted a piece which was at the time an exercise in sonata allegro form, which I decided to make the third movement of a sonata in d minor. I've had this theme in my head for a while, so I decided it would be the perfect time to use it. I went down a big rabbit hole of nonfunctional modal harmony, which was quite fun but really challenging to work out (though I wrote the secondary theme in five minutes during a chemistry lecture). sonata in d minor movement 1 audio.mp3 sonata in d minor movement 1 score.pdf

I enter

No, they are not allowed since you need a trio Quartet, or a quintet .chamber Orchestra’s or in this case what you may be referring to as a string orchestra at minimum could contain at least up to nine players. Two per part other than double bass since they rarely get Div.

Hallo @interlect , that is a good question. Honestly, I also never heard about „Counter-Melody“ or „Twin Melody“. However, since I’ve always use counterpoint when composing, possibly I can explain something about. First of all, the “reviewers” who have concluded that this piece is not counterpoint may be somewhat surprised, since the piece has a “jazz” or “big band” feel that one doesn’t necessarily expect when looking forward to a piece performed on an organ, a piano, or perhaps by a chamber orchestra. But that kind of „style“ is not the issue. Counterpoint is not a style of music or related only with a certain era, namely the Baroque time. There is, for example, a Russian composer, Nikolai Kapustin, who wrote always in Jazz „style“, including 24 preludes and fugues in Jazz style, which – of cause – apply counterpoint. So, counterpoint is a composing technique, rather than a style: Counterpoint, or polyphonic music is all about voices that form rhythmically and melodically independent (horizontal) musical lines. When two or more such voices occur in a piece of music, they interact with each other, following certain contrapuntal rules and thus creating harmony. Since all voices are equally carriers of the melodic and rhythmic material, there is no specific melody voice and no subordinate accompaniment, for example through (vertical) chords. While singing independently, the voices do not have to be completely unrelated. Often, one voice repeats or imitates what another voice has sung before, as is the case in a canon, for example. Counterpuntal compositional technique fascinates with its efficiency in the use of thematic material. Once started with the (fugue) subject and the „accompaniment“ in the other voices (which is, in fact, no accompaniment but material being developed in interaction with the subject), there is enough material with which to compose without having to stop and reflect. To come back to your example: To me, it’s inherently a typical jazz piece based on a chord progression over which the band begins to improvise. In a chord progression, the vertical approach—that is, the chords themselves with their harmonies—is the fundamental compositional or improvisational technique. The melodic material follows these harmonies and generates the horizontal lines as a result of them, rather than as their original idea. And even though your two brass sections interact with each other in a kind of melodic dialogue, I get the impression that they are engaged in a “playful competition” to see who can deliver the better improvisation over the underlying jazz harmonies, rather than developing a “subject” or thematic material. There’s nothing wrong with that, and I really liked the piece, but it is also for me no counterpoint, and the other classifications like “Twin melody” or “Counter-Melody” (which, as far as I know, aren’t clearly defined terms) seem to be an attempt to express in a single word what I’ve tried to explain in more detail.

Hello! This piece was one of my favourites to compose, sadly the software that i use to render the lyrics (Cantamus) didnt work nicely for the words: Cricket, Leap'd, Jump'd, Alive, Pass'd and Tra la la. So sorry for that! I hope one day they can update the software and its able to render it correctly! (If you guys have suggestions for free realistic vocal synthesizers i would be pleased to check them!) The story is about a woman and her beloved singer cricket, who sadly has passed. Alternative title (Detto lo) "lament for the death of a singer cricket." Lyrics: I once had a cricket green and strong and he went: tra la la la He leap'd and jump'd and sang, He did not use the common slang tra la la la Then one dark day he pass'd my cricket went away No more music no more dance, goodbye my cricket. tra la la la. I once had a friend that sang for me and he went: tra la la la But now he's not alive, And i still sing in the wildlife tra la la la No money in this world can buy my cricket back No gold coins nor golden rings can buy my cricket tra la la la. Poem written by: MYSELF! mixdown-_1_.mp3

This is my submission for the Landscapes competition. For my landscape I have chosen this photo I took a few years ago while on vacation on Whidbey Island, which sits on the Puget Sound near Seattle. It's written for Oboe, Bassoon, and Harp. I wanted to capture the quiet, stillness of the moment with music that is very simple and delicate. Morning On Whidbey Island.mp3 Morning On Whidbey Island - Score.pdf

I'm really enjoying this movement and shall have to check out the rest! One thing your orchestral style reminds me of is the style of parts of Bartok's Concerto for Orchestra, where folksy tunes and whimsical syncopation disguise rather dissonant harmony! Just wondering; do you write directly into the computer, or on paper? Honestly, I can't tell, which is a good thing...I will write directly into the computer for a piano piece, but wouldn't do so for a symphony, if I ever wanted to write another. Heck, it kinda reminds me of the Shostakovich First, teenage masterpiece, in its playful quirkiness. I'll be looking into more of your stuff.

I declare my intent to join into this competition

To fix this, I'd suggest setting your page margins and score size to fit Letter sized pages, only. As when you export PDF, it will try to fit the score on a standard printer sized page. You can also attempt to shrink the size of the score by going to Format > Page Settings... > Staff Space: (Lower this value to decrease the size of the staff, which will allow for more room on the page to fit it while shrinking the overall size, or, increase it to enlarge the staff, allowing for less to fit on the page.)

Hi @Bjarke ! Good job making the score look cleaner! I think it really simplifies the look when you write it in 9/8. But you could have applied the same logic to the 5/4 bar as well! You could have written it as a 15/8 bar! Thanks for sharing.

Why hello! Thank you so much for taking the time to listen and write such a detailed comment—I really appreciate it :) I’d be happy to share the full score! It’s still a bit messy since it came together from sketches, but I’m currently cleaning it up and will share it as soon as it’s presentable. Your point about saving some of those authentic cadences for a coda (especially with cymbals) is very interesting, and I think you’re right that it could make the ending feel more impactful. I've used similar structures in my codas, usually ending the introduction with a subtle phrase. This time it was a bit different, but hey! I'm glad they provided a great start :) And I love reinforcing the waltz harmony with brass and winds underneath (specially with the French Horn)! Thanks again for the kind words and thoughtful feedback—it really means a lot!

Greetings! This is a very simple madrigal, as when i was making this i was very bored, so the writing isn't my best. But i kinda like it. Enjoy! LOB 72 There was once a bird.mp3

Melodies Themes Motives Harmony Chords Textures Form Development Structure Time Originality Creativity Score Presentation Instrumentation Orchestration Playability Execution of Given Challenge Taste 9.5 9 9.5 8.5 10 9.5 8 8 Average Score: 9

Seeing as my schedule will open up in the next few weeks, I suppose I will participate :)

This piece of music did it’s a really good job, capturing the quietness and beauty of the given landscape. It’s not really my cup of tea, but it’s relaxing and it gives the atmospheric feeling that you’re actually there. Melodic material. 7.5 Chords and texture 6.7 Structure 7.4 Originality 8.2 Engraving 9.7 Orchestration and playability 7 Execution 9.86 taste 5.2 Total 7.69

Very Good Well Done You've Set a Standard that's Hard to compete with.... By using only 3 Instruments, you've been able to create an inspiring, "MOOD".

Sometimes I just sit down at the keyboard and just let my fingers go wherever they want to. Most of the time I fail to capture any of that and immediately forget what I did. Today however, I just happened to be recording and captured what I played. I thought this wasn’t that bad and decided to share it. Hope you enjoy my playing around on the keys. Stream of consciousness.mp3

A beautiful piece that strikes me as being in the neoclassical style. It’s always lovely to see handwritten sheet music. I’m not sure if it’s a live performance or a virtual instrument; these days, anything is possible. The sound is a bit ‘muddled’ for my taste in a style like this.

Wieland, thank you for taking the time to comment on my work. Your interest is much appreciated. Mark

Well, whether or not you wrote specific bowings, you still wrote slur markings for the strings, which to them imply bowing information. Whether or not it's explicit, you can always justify your reasoning as the following; "With the given technicality of the work already demanding high accuracy from the performer, I wanted to take today to test if my orchestration would make the bowing information clear and implicit. For today, I decided to give their bowing instructions based on the slur markings in their parts, and following this session, I will amend and update the bowing instructions on the final copy of the score before its first performance." This essentially covers you in case they ask about it

I really enjoyed this! I think you capture the "voice" of Schoenberg that he has in most of his orchestral works. I said this in a previous review, but orchestration is really subjective....so here are my suggestions: First piece I think the oboe is suppose to be piano as well (it's not marked in the score). I also think the pickup Trumpet run can be transferred to the clarinet I don't think the 1st trombone needs to double the cello/horn in the 4th bar. In measure 7, unless the orchestra has 5 timpani drums (or an EXTREMELY good player who can quickly adjust tuning) that is going to be difficult In measure 8, that trumpet part looks questionable...that 32nd note might be messy In bars 13-14, probably could combine the cello/bass part to be played by divided cello....helps with thinning out the sound since it's marked p Generally, it's really hard for brass players to play pp or ppp when there is a moving/active part with leaps. I would give the trombone/tuba part to a bass clarinet and/or bassoon near the end. Second piece I would've used bassoons instead of horn in the 2nd measure. They sound more "dry" staccato and will blend with the pizzicato I'm assuming "ord" means Arco? make that clear in the string parts Trombones don't usually read in treble clef. I would change that to a tenor clef in the last measure. Third piece I would just have the tuba play without doubling from trombone. The passage is already pp and tuba has a more rounder sound for that I think the pppp markings are a bit much Fourth piece Measure 10: that bassoon/trumpet figure is going to be very tricky to play in unison. I would just have trumpet play it (even though it would be a challenge) Fifth piece From how it's written in the score, it looks you only want half of the 2nd violin section play measures 8-11? Sixth piece There is a lot of pp and ppp in here...but a lot of instrument doubling - for example bars 5-6 cello/bass doubling bass trombone/tuba AND all bass instruments the last measure. I would do mutes for all strings and brass in this piece. Maybe even solo strings to reduce the sound. The last two eight notes could easily be just a single bass player doing pizzicato

Hello @Luis Hernández ! I’m not able to write a „review“ today since therefore I would like to explore the six little piano pieces in more depth in its original version to compare them with your orchestration. So for now, all I can say is that I really enjoyed them and consider them good examples of orchestration—especially for someone like me who has no experience yet. The great thing about them is that the pieces are so short yet still expressive—so there should be no excuse not to go even deeper into the details (if the time allows me). Now, somewhat off-topic: Two days ago, I attended a performance of Dvořák’s “Stabat Mater” with a full orchestra and a massive choir (430 singers). This was a real fun, not only because of the bombastic sound, but also because I was able to follow Dvořák’s orchestration live. It is the total contrast to the „six little piano pieces“, since he stays very long on the harmonies and even single tones – letting them „rotate“ through the entire orchestra. At one point, you hear and see the cellos playing a chord while the double basses accompany them with pizzicato. A moment later, you can still hear the chord, but you see that the cellos have stopped playing, and after a moment of surprise, you realize that the horns have taken over and the pizzicato has been reinforced by the timpani. Yet the transition was so seamless that you didn’t even notice the change in instruments, only a slight shift in timbre. And by the way, the first movement of the “Stabat Mater” begins with exactly one note being played for nine measures, passing through all the instruments before the main theme begins. That reminded me of one of your recent posts: “What can I do with two notes?” 🙂