Leaderboard

Dear fellow composers, I’m pleased to present you today my submission to the YCF 2026 Summer Competition! I must admit, that the task of the competition was really challenging, starting from „Nothing“ and than get the right ideas for „Something“ that is reminiscent to the mood of the summer day as expressed by Paul Verlaine’s poem. The challenge. When a composer has trouble coming up with a brilliant idea for a new piece, it sometimes takes several attempts, each of which yields different individual ideas. And there are some pieces that consist of several ideas that have been “glued” together, ultimately resulting in something like a “collage song.” I’m thinking, for example, of “A Day in the Life” by the Beatles or “Band on the Run” by Paul McCartney and Wings. However, there also exists such a kind of piece in Bach’s Welltempered Clavier, the Prelude VII in E-flat major, BWV 852. That particular prelude starts with a short section with runs of 32th notes, followed by a „more serious“ part in slow motion, that reminds me at a „chorale“. The third and longest part is a fugato with two subjects that further develops the ideas from the first two sections. So with this particular Bach prelude in mind, I had thus found the model for my own prelude, which serves as the „sketch“ for the quintet finally presented here as my submission. I always start to compose the pieces for piano in order to – on the one hand, have another piece for my preludes and fugues project, and on the other hand, because I find it to hard to mix the two phases of „composing“ and „orchestrating“ together. So I have posted the piano version as a standalone piece "Prelude XXI in B flat major" on the „Piano Music, Solo Keyboard“ thread. The poem. When I came around to the second part, the “Chorale” section, I faced the challenge of treating the upper voice of this four-part harmony as the melody for a musical setting of the poem. Since I don’t speak a word of French and have no idea how the syllables are rhythmicized, I looked at Gabriel Fauré’s setting of the poem in his Op. 61, No. 7 to find out which words are pronounced or sung briefly and which are longer. As an interesting fact, I discovered that Fauré had actually chosen the same key, B-flat major, that I had chosen before. The instrumentation. Now that the decision had been made to set the poem to music, I wondered how I could orchestrate it so that it would sound like a French “chanson.” My first thought was to choose the accordion as the main accompanying instrument. And since I wasn’t sure, I Googled: “What are the typical accompanying instruments for a French chanson?”—and sure enough, “accordion,” “guitar,” and “piano” came up. In addition to these, and to take advantage of the possibility of a quintet, I use a trumpet and a cello. Both of these instruments are capable of contributing different timbres (the cello either played with a bow or pizzicato, and the trumpet either muted or unmuted), and during the poem stanzas, I always use the muted trumpet as a substitute for the human voice. The title. Another challenge. A title in French would be appropriate, but I do not really trust translation programs in such delicate situations, since I don’t understand the nuances of the possible result. Thus, I’ve chosen the simple title „Summer – A Song of Beauty and Melancholy“. The latter since the piece features more passages in minor than in major and, therefore, does not only express the joy and beauty of the summer day, but is somewhat melancholic, too. Form and structure: 00:00 (mm. 1-14) The first section is an „improvisation“ which introduces the warm key of B-flat major. 00:34 (mm. 15-29) The second Adagio section could be a „chorale“ and is used to set the first stanza of the poem to music. 01:31 (mm. 30-90) The third and longest section is a fugato based on two subjects, interspersed by further stanzas of the poem (second stanza 02:18 at mm. 48-63 and third stanza 03:37 at mm. 75-90). The first subject quotes the first four-note motif of the „improvisation“ section and develops it further, paired with the second subject, thus creating a joyful and dance-like mood. 04:22 (mm. 91-114) The piece finishes with a coda – or better to say – with a recapitulation of the „improvisation“ from the first section. Now in a more melancholic way, meandering between minor and major. I hope, you’ll enjoy it. Wieland Finally, as a kind of „non-AI proof“ I also attached my „working score“ from which the MIDI is generated. It is nearly unreadable and of cause not intended for playing but shows in detail all dynamics, articulations, agogics etc. I applied to achieve the final recording. Praeludium-XXI-B-flat-major-accordion-mix.mp3 Praeludium-XXI-B-flat-major-accordion-with-coversheet.pdf WORKING-SCORE-P21.pdf

Hi! Just assessing Henry here, I guess. @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu note that accordionists overall, specially those who are amateur, or just interested in performing, will know as much as any non-player (but musician) of the ways this instrument may be properly engraved. More often than not, as it happens with many other instruments, we "convert" the information to our format on the go. I fear something similar would happen to the piece you've brought to my attention. Now, in regards of the accordion scoring of this PDF I'd say that : RH specified at the beginning of the piece do not match with the provided sounds (LH could, but I'm not certain, it sounds like a Soft Bass and it definitely has no soprano voice sounding in those very first bars that I'm discussing right after this bullet) MMM or MM for the RH are the ones you're looking for, at least judging by the soundfont which appears to be a french musette, so it's either that or open violin register. Note that no registers work for providing thirds neither accordionist spawn them on the go. I'm seeing the working score and I just don't get why there are so many notes that are just not present. Note that not all accordions have these, some 3-voice Piginis and other famous italian concerto accordion brands prefer the dry sound of the harmonium register, LMH. or 4' + 8' + 16'. Your sound is 8'+8' or 8'+8'+8', assuming it's the one you are seeking for. Chord movements by semitones are to be avoided if possible. Otherwise, you'll be inflicting tremendous pain to the accordionist, assuming Stradella system since it's the one you're using. So, without extending myself much, let's just review some examples. These are M15 to M18 if I'm not mistaken. RH register, according to the audio, should be MMM or MM as I mentioned. Bass voice doesn't sound like Soft Tenor but that's minor. What's not minor is that F#dim and Bdim are so far away from each other and from the G7 and C buttons, demanding unneeded agility. Here there's no other option than to briefly discuss voicing. The voicing on standard 6-row stradella accordions with 2 rows of basses and 4 rows of chords is root+m3+7dim (and depending on the register, that can be doubled or tripled in octaves above and below). There's no fifth sound, neither in the 7 button chord, allowing the accordionist to essentially do a Xm6 or a Xº by using the dim button and the proper bass, and some other interesting combinations. And thus, all these red notes are... Not quite accurate, to say the least. According to the register you are using in the score (soft tenor), chords should be an octave higher with the proper voicings. No chord button alone produces more than 3 notes. M/m -> 1-M/m3-5, and for the other two (7, d), you take the 5th. You can find more information about Stradella voicings here in case you be interested in making it right. I have briefly talked about this for a reason, since you're not doing the complete Xº tetrad, the symmetry of chords marked "d" is in principle broken. But since I don't think it's gonna be a problem because the F# is already being played by another instrument, in that excerpt I would change F#º by Cº, which is very close to the G an C chords you're gonna play afterwards, and also, on a similar fashion and by using a similar argument, I would change Bº → Fº. Note that similar occurences happen throghout the whole piece. Finally, there are many register changes that are not reflected in the audio at all. In fact, since the very beginning it's clear that there's no "Clarinet M" sounding, but a French musette. While I can understand the limitations because most usual accordion soundfonts come with musette or in two voices already, there are plenty of incorrect examples. Here I tried to point out some. M26-28. The "Master" register uses 5 voices in the bass buttons, 5 because the contralto doubles the alto voice in half of the octave and the tenor voice in the other half, adding to the previous Soprano (2') + Alto (4') + Tenor (8') + Basso (16'). The website I shared notes C to F in alto and F# to B in tenor, but truth be told, this depends 100% on the manufacturer. On the right hand we got a fair deal of strange stuff too. You write "Musette Imitation", which consists on 2 middle voices (8'+8', one lightly detuned forward, usually) and a voice that's an octave higher. And that's for all notes, not jut for the ones you'd like to double, sorry. What's usually the benefit of changing registers that much in a piece? Little, unless you are Gianfelice Fugazza and you know exactly, and I mean exactly what you're doing, in the context of a pedagogic piece, an étude, an example, or a concerto piece. So I can assure you that with no loss of sound quality or musicality, had you removed all RH register changes and replaced them by an open violin (8'+8') and/or a musette (8'+8'+8') register, the sound would be closer to what the audio depicts and probably to what you were seeking for, since: Accordion, yes! Any accordion? Nein! A French musette accordion, a Cavagnolo, a Mengascini. Not a dry Pigini and if you wanna be just right about the french sound, not even a Hohner would do the trick. Ah, and these are often traditionally button accordions, not keyboard accordions, but you'll find a handful of them too. By doing what I suggested, you'll get rid of difficult/uncomfortable sections. Apart from the chord issues, we'd clean up things like these: Not impossible at all. But if you don't have one of these expensive accordions (that won't sound like French musette) that come with chin switches, you'd better pray these three registers are close enough. And just in case, the other hand is busy handling the bellows. And again, your working score (which I assume you used for the audio) doesn't correctly notate the passage according to the registers of choice. That said, the piece was nice to listen to. Not my turn to evaluate it, and I don't really want to bore you further, but the "Engraving" and "Playability" parts (which are definitely related in my opinion... Something may be possible to perform but its actual playability could be demeaned by its poor engraving) would not get a pass from me, sorry Wieland. I mean: your score frontpage looks very nice, it's original, and imo shows great care for it (though, why does it say 15 of 24 if this is the XXI? Or I'm in the wrong?). So, what happened here? Why none of that permeated into the score itself? Lack of time? Perhaps indolence? Lack of inertia or eagerness cause many may not make use of it for judging? I'm sorry if I'm being hard, but I'm not ill intentioned at all here, I just do not understand. I may not agree with every engraving choice you made in your XXI Praeludium for piano solo but that shows how you could have got a way cleaner score out of this. Or maybe not? If you don't mind, Wieland: what software are you using? Musescore 4? I think this reply is long enough already. I wish you the best for this competition. May you find any of this of help. Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

Hi there! It's been a while, mostly because of internet issues. Hopefully everyone around here has been well :) I never share much about these, I figure I'll start trying to be better about that. Because of said internet issues, I started focusing on writing by hand, and it's been great. As I translated back and forth from paper to Sibelius, I felt my voice was more intimate and clear, without the possibilities of what a computer can do. Especially for dynamics, just reading the score without playback has been instrumental in getting better at envisioning dynamics. Maybe that sounds dumb, but it's been a plus in my new writing habits. I've actually more or less finished all of these (there are 24 in total), I've just been touching up scores. I'll probably give a few weeks in between each post, but the goal is regular posting. These preludes aren't preludes to fugues or any other planned pieces, but rather preludes to a future voice I'm always amending and crafting. I also think a prelude should be somewhat experimental, and with each one I've strived to have some interesting nugget to explore compositionally that I haven't before. With this one, No. 17, I wanted an abstract rhythm to be dominant, for the tonal center to be constantly moving, and a palindrome-like form as a structure. This is one of the strangest of the bunch, and as always, and advice or comments are welcome! I hope you enjoy 😁 EDIT: Henry = 🔥 Prelude 17 - Full Score.pdf Vince Prelude no.17.mp3

This is the 3rd movement of my Clarinet Quintet in C minor, which is completed 4 years ago and I'm revising it. Thx to my friend Vince @Thatguy v2.0 for making the audio! Here is the pdf, audio, video of the movement. I have also made a structural graph since this movement is a fugal one and I want to show the structure more clearly. https://youtu.be/QMQyFbriSmM (For YT)Clarinet Quintet in C minor 3rd mov Final Version 20260906.pdfClarinet Quintet in C minor 3rd mov Final.mp3Clarinet Quintet 3rd Mov Structural Plan.pdf To me this is core movement in the piece and my favourite. After 2nd movement's anxious power I finally calm down to reflect subjectively and (more)objectively, which are represented by Lament and Fugue respectively with the following structure: 0:00 1st Lament, using the despair [0134] motive again, then incorporate the (future) fugue subject in the clarinet while strings keep lamenting, and ends with one more question of despair. Real lament after what is suffered in the first 30 minutes of the work. 1:10 1st Fugue. Appearance of prime form of the subject. I always go for F minor in any secondary themes or answer in my C minor works because G minor is always too weak for C minor. Only F minor is dark enough for it. First stretto in 3:05. Ends in F minor with angry despair. 4:03 2nd Lament. A complete new part for this movement added only in this final version, sounds more dissonant than anything else in the movement, further intensifies the pain. 5:00 2nd Fugue. Using the retrograde form of the subject as main subject, denoting the backward reflection of me on despair. The flow here is also more fluid. [BACH] in viola in 6:56. Prime subject joins again in 7:16 to have stretto with the retrograde subject. Ends in F minor again with augmented subject in 8:07. 8:25 3rd Lament. My favourite of the movement, the sheer pain especially in 8:41-9:00 always aches my heart. But human beings only change after pain and I am no exception, so after this painful passage some hope is finally invited to the party to modulate to E flat major for next part. 9:40 3rd Fugue. Using the inverted form of the subject as main subject, denoting the complete upside down of thought from despair to hope. Later the retrograde inversion form of the subject enters in 11:08 to represent even further distance from despair. The climax in 11:48 is the most hopeful passage in what's happened in the entire Quintet up to this point. But after it doubts continue to enter. Despair starts invading in 12:42, and in 13:18 the prime form in tonic c minor enters in a subconscious Viola entry plus an augmented 2nd violin entry. I think a lot on whether to extend the transition or not, but finally I just decided to keep it this way since an early defeat of hope can represent the cruelty of despair and the weakness of hope more. I love the sheer pain here, and the return of prime subject on cello in 13:40 means the struggle of hope is futile. An E flat major prime entry on Clarinet try to struggle once more but falls to despair again, a final prime subject on cello in 14:11 announces the defeat of hope. The section ends on a German Sixth chord to leave the music suspended. 14:36 Final Lament and coda. Solo by Clarinet, wants to escape by quoting the dream motive in G flat major like in 1st movement but has to accept despair. In 15:19 the opening returns to remind unsettled affair. In 15:36 all four forms of subject appear for a final conclusion and lament and acceptance of despair and tragedy. Only by acceptance you may recover from it. The biggest change I made in this revision is the addition of 2nd Lament and repetition of 1st Lament. This is my original plan but with the bad sound sample I deleted them in my final draft. But now with Vince's great rendition I think it's better to retain them and extend the Laments to match the overall narrative structure. I also change the entrance order of the instrument, some counterpoint and details here and there etc. In terms of fugal treatment I make use of all four forms (prime, retrograde, inversion and retrograde inversion) of the same subject to denote the ups and downs, thinking backward and forward of me, so they are not merely fugal devices but also have narrative function. Hopefully you enjoy the movement, feel free to criticize it and leave comments here. It's a long movement and a long description, and I gratefully thank you if you listen and read till the end! P.S Here are YC posts of previous movements: 1st Mov: 2nd Mov: Henry

Hello! (I came here from @Lithl's tag. Thank you! Btw I am listening to Saint Saens Concerto 5! It's great. You should try too!) So I don't believe you need any music theory to start composing, but to get better, and faster at the 'getting better', you do need music theory. I am technically a self-taught composer. I only started music theory lessons last year. I literally just write what I think would sound good. Here is a sample. Idea pops into brain during important test. (I am thirteen so I am still in school) I finish writing the test but idea is still there. I finish the rest of the day without forgetting the idea. I forget it on the way home. I re-remember it after like 5 hours. I go on musescore and write it. And just pay attention to a few stuff. Try to prevent parallel motion. Only later I was taught this was actually theory, but I first came up with this when I was seven. Voice leading! Very important. Same as the one before, but I came up with this when I was six. Try to break the rules 1 and 2 effectively. Got it? It is simple. Music composition is like a huge field, something like 内蒙古. You start from different places and go to different places. You do whatever you want. Whatever you think works. You will gain self-consciousness gradually and therefore improve. When I was nine, I thought I was good at composition. Now looking back, although still better than my classmates', it is nothing compared to my work now and some of the fellows on this site, YC. I see you are new, and that's not a problem, and by your state right now, it seems like you are very interested in composition. Good news! That's the first step to become a good composer or good anything. You are intrigued by it. When I first joined, this is what @Thatguy v2.0 said to me not long after I joined. Thank you once again, @Thatguy v2.0!!! @Woofi_9 Good luck! P.S. @Lithl Your reviews are not bad, they are great! Although it may not be backed up with music theory, it gives a listener's thought on the music. Very important. -TristanTheTristan

It's me. I don't know much about music theory, and while I'd like to learn, as someone who chose not to go to a music university and hasn't received formal musical training, it feels difficult. I think there are some people who started learning by themselves. I'm aware that there are very useful tools available for learning it, but it takes time, and I haven't gotten around to it. The problem with not learning about music theory in YCF is that my reviews are not going to be good. I often feel that my feedback might not be all that constructive, but I imagine people are happy to receive impressions from others, so I write reviews as a way of giving back. I have much respect for those who provide detailed feedback grounded in music theory, such as @PeterthePapercomPoser, @Luis Hernández, @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu, @MK_Piano, @Markus Boyd, @TristanTheTristan, @Wieland Handke, @Kvothe, @Omicronrg9 and others. I usually use a synthesizer, so I don't directly need to use music theory for composing, but I think learning music theory brings more diverse ideas and makes compositions better. So, I believe learning music theory is great. In this post, @Kvothe kindly responded to my question about how I can learn notation. It's about notation, not theory, but please check it out for your reference. How Can I Learn Music Notation https://www.youngcomposers.com/t49854/how-can-i-learn-music-notation/ Best, Lithl.

Attached is my submission to the "From Nothing, to Something" Summer 2026 Composition Competition Submission. I decided to set Verlaine's original French poem for two vocalists (solo soprano and solo tenor). To fit the French vibes, I rounded out the ensemble with a trio of flute, viola, and harp. The French sound I continued into parts of the harmony, opening with chords mostly made out of whole tone scales. As for form, the tenor takes the firs stanza, the soprano second with a mixed around order of phrases, and then they sing primarily together for the final stanza. I was composing this with professional players in mind, so the parts are of a higher difficulty level. Program Note: This setting, originally created for the Young Composers Forum "From Nothing, to Something" Summer 2026 Composition Competition, casts a different light on Paul Verlaine’s summer love poem, Donc, ce sera par un clair jour d'été. With the challenge being to capture the sensation of summer, I hoped to focus in on liminal moments throughout the season. The two vocalists, being the depicted couple in Verlaine's poem, first sing individually to each other, telling of the fleeting beauty and pleasure found in a summer love. Finally the two join together in harmony, as the stars look down gently on husband and wife. Devor - Donc, ce sera par un clair jour d'été_FINAL.mp3 Devor - Donc, ce sera par un clair jour d'été_FINAL.pdf

Score PDF and Audio Download About the Piece: This piece is written for 4 soprano saxophones. It has three movements: “La soie,” “Le ciel,” and “Le soir.” Each movement is based on a stanza from the original poem by Paul Verlaine, “Donc, ce sera par un clair jour d'été.” ______________________________________________________________________________ I - La soie (The silk) ______________________________________________________________________________ II - Le ciel (The sky) ______________________________________________________________________________ III - Le soir (The evening) ______________________________________________________________________________

There are all kinds of opinions on this. I think learning music theory is very helpful if you want to be a composer. Of course, you can compose without knowing anything—by ear or intuition—but the possibilities that open up when you have more knowledge will definitely make your compositions better. I don’t think you need to know a lot—or even a little—about music theory, or anything else for that matter, to comment on compositions in this forum. There’s an intuitive, emotional aspect—and so on—that we all have, and that’s perfectly fine to discuss. Simply saying “I liked it,” “it reminds me of this,” or asking a question about the piece is a positive way to comment. Nor do I think that knowing theory—or anything else for that matter—requires formal training at an accredited institution. I do think, however, that if you want to make serious, steady progress as a self-taught musician, there will be times—and in certain disciplines—when you’ll need guidance from someone: a teacher, a workshop, etc. That’s been my experience. I’ve always been self-taught in music (in fact, my profession is something entirely different). But I took a formal course in tonal and modal harmony, as well as some courses in harmonization and arranging. Later, taking a course in counterpoint was essential, as was a seminar on fugues. Another essential course was the one I took on Contemporary Composition Techniques. And finally, the one I’m taking now on orchestration. With that foundation, I can tackle anything that comes my way, understand it, and put it to use. I also believe that the foundation of it all is tonal harmony and the common classical period, from the Baroque to the Romantic era—even if you’re later interested in another style.

Thanks for the tag @Lithl It’s difficult to recommend how one should learn ‘music theory’ on here without understanding what type of music they wish to compose. This forum is so diverse and it is thus inappropriate for me, for example, to apply the 18th century paradigm (that i’ve trained myself in) in a generalized way, as if all other paradigms are dependent on its method. So before I even attempt to answer that question, understanding one’s intentions is often my starting point. That said, I do believe in learning the fundamentals of tonal music before branching out into one’s preferred domain. Start by understanding what makes you passionate in music. Which composer’s music resonates with you most? Does their music influence your own aspirations? Next, listen widely. I listen extensively to music largely in my preferred idiom (18th century and early 19th century) and many of the patterns and narrative techniques associated with that school have become more or less embedded into my consciousness. This doesn’t help with theory per se, but it is invaluable for generating my own melodic ideas. Crucially, it will be your own passion that will lead you down which rabbit hole. I have books i can recommend to aid your journey, but i’d rather understand your intentions first. There is an analogy that likens the knowledge of music theory to that of an iceberg: the deeper one goes, the more specialized that knowledge becomes. But it is worth recognizing that different styles of music will have their own ‘iceberg’. We do not master them all, but tend to focus on that relating to our own preferred domain (eg. Jazz, common practice, romanticism, serialism, modal, cinematic, etc…). Feel free to message me directly with any questions you may have.

[UPDATED - OCT. 2026] The following post was a formal submission for the 2026 Summer Competition: From Nothing, to Something. Below includes a detailed and extensive explanation of the work, both in inspiration and construction. If you wish to skip, the score PDF and Audio will be found at the end. Thanks for viewing this work! [TAKEN FROM SCORE] Plus belle encor votre chère beauté  - Your dear beauty lovelier still Duration: c. 6:08 Written in 2026, Plus belle encor votre chère beauté is a work for piano quartet that evokes summer and the experience of love. It was composed for the “2026 Summer Competition” hosted by The Young Composers Music Forum and is inspired by Paul Verlaine’s poem “Donc, ce sera par un clair jour d’été,” whose opening line may be translated as: “So, on a bright summer day it shall be.” The poem is number nineteen in Verlaine’s collection La Bonne Chanson (The Good Song) Find the French text and translation to the poem here The title of this work is drawn directly from the French text and has similar inspiration as the Gabriel Fauré song from his op. 61 bearing the same name as the Verlaine poem. However, this work takes the title from the fourth line of text, and unlike Fauré, this work is late-romantic in style. The musical inspiration came from two places: Tchaikovsky and his Nutcracker ballet, and a spell of improvisation at the piano. This work was created in late July and early August 2026, and during that time, I was experimenting with modal improvisation, and felt drawn to G-lydian. Specifically, the iv 7 chord you can build and find in Tchaikovsky’s music. However, I did not set the piece into the lydian mode, only hinting at C# to use for predominant and secondary function. It was also around this time I was listening to parts of the Nutcracker, where I felt drawn to the idea of harp-writing, and thus, during a period of improvisation, the foundation of this work came to be. With structure, Plus belle encor votre chère beauté is in ternary (A-B-A’) form and includes an intro and coda. The B-section acts as our development while the outer A-sections are comprised of a smaller AABA form. The principal theme stated in the A-section occurs throughout the work, where it can be heard in the introduction, coda and within the development where the piano states the principal theme in inversion. Lastly, I composed this work following the end of a relationship. In short, this work evokes those unspoken emotions I harbored and the romance I long to have one day. A day where I too can say “Your dear beauty.” (The art on the cover page is Claude Monet's "Woman with a Parasol." A wonderful piece of art!) Comments are welcome, both constructive or positive! If you enjoyed this work, leave a react, and follow my page so you don't miss any new works in the future. It's free and you can always remove it later. Thanks and see you all soon! AUDIO_YourDearBeauty.mp3 SCORE_YourDearBeauty.pdf

Hi all, My entry for the "From Nothing, to Something" Summer 2026 Composition Competition is a short mixed quintet called "Your dear beauty lovelier still". This was definitely the most challenging piece I have made: making something from nothing was by far the hardest thing I have done so far here. I couldn't find anything that would represent summer apart from giving this song the lyrics of the poem this competition is based on (Donc, ce sera par un clair jour d'été). Btw, since Musescore doesn't have any soundfonts that can sing lyrics, you won't be able to hear the lyrics in the audio. Here is the pdf I hope you enjoy 😁 your-dear-beauty-lovelier-still-musicbro456.custom_score.mp3

I finally finished! I thought we were supposed to adapt the poem to be sung, so that's what I composed. For voice and piano trio! Attached is the link to the youtube video, as well as the pdf of the score and the mp3 audio. So on a bright summer day.mp3 So on a bright summer day.pdf

on pastel skies was “commissioned” (more in this case called for) by the young composers 2026 summer competition fit this team after a poem about the serene atmosphere of the Midsummer afternoon So, on a bright summer day it shall be: The great sun, my partner in joy, Shall make, amid the satin and the silk, Your dear beauty lovelier still; The sky, all blue, like a tall canopy, Shall quiver sumptuously in the long folds Above our two happy brows, grown pale With pleasure and expectancy; And when evening comes, the breeze shall be soft And play caressingly about your veils, And the peaceful stars looking down Shall smile benevolently on man and wife. The gestation of this piece (initial thought, even before the entry of the first note) was an image of a dreamy Florida sunset over the Gulf of Mexico with this image the piece will transport you to another dimension of into the pastel pink, orange, and red opalescent skies instrumentation xylophone (doubling on glockenspiel and crotales, /w large zill bell attachment vibraphone I /w sus and Z.bell and dull metallic object (something like a Burma bell) vibraphone II /w sus and Z.bell and dull metallic object (something like a Burma bell) Marimba I /w sus and temple blocks Marimba II /w Chimes, sus and temple blocks and large, vibrating drum ( tom or surdo ect.) Very important note ^please use the official scoring system if you feel like it and if you’re able to with this piece, it helps a lot with my learning and also feedback and scoring of the music also is very important for my statistical research^ On Pastel Skies.mp3 On Pastel Skies.pdf

Hi! New here, just trying this out. This is a composition on piano I made like a year ago just as a sort of writing practice thing to see what I could do without using the tonic A Minor chord. Hope you enjoy! (Also prob not gonna share the sheet music here since i didn't have the playability in mind and the notation is god awful and this is one of the first times I used a DAW to produce the music lmfao) Azalea.mp3

If you are interested, this is what Rimsky-Korsakov says about melody in octaves using woodwinds: The use of two instruments of the same colour in octaves, e.g. 2 flutes, 2 clarinets or 2 bassoons etc., if not exactly to be avoided is certainly not to be recommended, as the instruments, playing in different registers will not correspond one with the other. Suggested combinations: Fl + Ob, Fl+Cl, Fl+Bs, Ob+Cl, Ob+Bs, Cl+Bs In his book, he also discusses doubling the melody in the very high register (with the piccolo) or in the low register (with the bassoon, contrabassoon or bass clarinet). He also mentions some combinations involving two instruments from the same family that do work (because they are actually distinct, such as the flute and alto flute). As well as doubling the melody in three- and four-part arrangements, etc. And with examples of everything. A classic but essential treatise. Alan Belkin also explain this issue: Professor Belkin Notes: There is in fact a good argument to be made that the WW are not one group at all, but rather, three (oboes and bassoons counting as one – double reed – family, with the English horn as intermediary). Unlike the strings, woodwinds do NOT behave similarly to one another in various registers. For example, flutes get softer as they get lower, whereas oboes/bassoons get louder. This diversity of color and of register is the main cause of the difficulty in writing well for winds. The beginner is advised to think of each woodwind instrument as really three in one: a high instrument, a medium one, and a low one. Although the transitions between registers are of course not really so drastic, combinations of woodwinds with each other and with from other families work differently depending on register. For example, a low flute melody requires a different accompaniment from a high flute melody. This is also the reason that it is actually easier to score for a larger woodwind section than a smaller one: When the auxiliaries are available, the range available IN ANY GIVEN HOMOGENOUS TIMBRE is much increased. A chord scored for alto flute, regular flutes and piccolo will present less problems of blend and balance than one scored for 2 flutes and 2 oboes. Of all the woodwinds, the oboe is one most likely to cause problems for the beginner. It is a natural “prima donna” and, while its melodic character can be wonderful in the right melody, it does not blend easily with most other timbres in the orchestra (exception: oboes blend quite well with SOFT, muted trumpets).

@Kvothe Please don't spread misinformation like this about the contest entries. The piece is 6 and a half minutes long and therefore meets the duration requirements of being between 3 - 7 minutes long. The piece is also written for a quartet of saxophones which is an acceptable instrumentation as the competition is for 3 - 5 individual instruments.

Evening, I've decided to come out of my comfort zone and, today, compose for my primary instrument, which is the classical guitar. I have played since 9 but in recent years have lost touch with it; but I have recently picked it up again and it has been giving me a new lease for life. Of course, it will be great to play my own music and this is my intention. Composing for the guitar has added difficulties owing to the layout of the fretboard. In addition, one must work out at which position of the fretboard certain passages should be played. If, for example, I tried to play this music up to fret 7 only, there would be a lot of awkward jumping around that isn't practical. On the score, I have added numbers beside certain notes which fingers should play them. The circular numbers above the stave denote the position I have determined. The next task will be to learn to play it at a reasonable standard. Once I have done, I will endeavor to upload my performance to this thread. This piece is largely baroque in style with some hints of classical, too. I have written it mostly in two parts, due to the speed and my intention to play it (I am not virtuosic!). In terms of my influences, I have been listening a lot to Bach's Keyboard Suites lately. I love his 3/8 movements (for example, the prelude for BWV 808. Soundtrack.mp3 Score.pdf

Hello @Woofi_9, since you are (relatively) new at this forum, first my warm welcome! Whenever one posts an unfinished piece – what I think is here the case due to the title and the plenty bars at the end with rests only – there is a good chance to receive rich feedback with usually polite suggestions for improvement. So I very appreciate @MK_Pianos explanations on „Melody and Harmony“ which are not only intended and useful for you, but for all readers of the forum. I can’t compare myself to him because I don’t have an entire „tutorial“, but only a repost with some considerations about „Rhythm and Texture“ which, I think, supplements Mason’s explanations. I intentionally just did not listen to the piece and am focusing only on that I am seeing in the score, trying to formulate my concerns and suggestions – however the piece might sound fine. A string quartet consists of four individual instruments, usually playing a single voice (and, furthermore, of four individual humans). Thus, it perfectly fits for a four-part-voice leading where each voice is „independent“ and „equal“ to each other. Such kind of music is called „polyphonic“ or even „counterpuntal“ music – the opposite to a musical „style“ that consists of a (prominent) melody voice and (subordinate) accompaniment. I think, your piece is a kind of this approach. However, we do need a memorable melody and rhythm, often called a „theme“, which is played multiple times (sometimes unchanged like in a canon or fugue - or otherwise slightly altered) by all instruments throughout the piece. So the role, which instrument is most prominent and which are the accompanying ones changes, finally creating variety. And there I’m coming now to my concerns or „criticism“: I can’t recognize such a memorable „theme“ which I would usually expect at the beginning of the piece in the upper voice. Instead, the Violin 1 has a somewhat repetitive texture with repeated half notes for the first 6 bars. Although the piece has enough distinctive textural motifs (each one bar long), they are not distributed well enough between the voices resulting in that the same motif is repeated too often by the same instrument (for example, the Cello in bars 9-14). My suggestion is, to take the one-bar motifs and create a „theme“ from them. In the example below, I have taken two passages, snippet them out and glued them together to create such a „theme“ from then which I would consider to distinctive enough. (Note, that I didn’t take care of the melody, i.e. the pitches and didn’t bother how it would sound, it is a rhythmic or textural example only). I would start with that „theme“ in Violin 1 and would repeat it at least two times (or better three times to involve all four instruments) thereafter by other voices. The other instruments should than apply rhythmical motifs which are contrary to that bars of the theme, meaning where the theme has a slow motion, the other instruments should have the faster motion – and vice versa.

Good evening, Many of you know me as a die hard zealot of the common practice period. But I have been experimenting recently with model / non-functional harmony. My reason for this centre largely on my admiration for the music of Jeremy Soule (famous as the composer of the video game series 'Elder Scrolls'), the film music of Howard Shore (e.g. LOTR) as well as my general appreciation of minimalism (Max Richter, for example). In many respects the theoretical basis of modal and non-functional harmony could not be more different - even sacrilegious - compared with CCP given the more 'liberal' approach to voice leading. For example, there is often an appetite for omitting the third of a chord for the effect it produces can be aligned with the 'scene' being supported (e.g. inducing a feeling of emptiness and mystery) as well as usage of consecutive 5ths to produce an 'archaic' style of voice (which could work if the scene involves exploration of a dark, ancient ruin, for example). Thus, with this type of music, what matters is less the 'rules' than the effect the writing produces. This has fascinated me. Although my own background, in which many of these 'rules have been embedded into my consciousness, taking this different approach to music has its challenges. It is all too tempting to revert to the voice leading that I know best. But it doesn't necessarily need to be one or the other... perhaps I can combine the two approaches. So I share with you my first serious attempt at this style. A few notes on my approach: In the first half, I prioritize establishing a tonal centre around C & G. The E is intentionally omitted to create tonal ambiguity - are we in C minor or C major? The first violin opens with a central motif that I later manipulate and exchange between the different voices at various pitches. This motif applies chromaticism that further adds mystery to the tonal centre Resolutions are avoided in a traditional sense: the cadence may end on an inversion without the third. Only towards the end of the piece do I start to apply resolutions but not without several evasions, before finishing with a compound cadence that marks the first and only moment with a complete cadence. Naturally I'd like to hear your thoughts. What do you feel? Also - those experienced in this type of music - what could I have done better? With thanks, Markus Weariness.mp3 Weariness.pdf

Hello. A brilliant piece of work. I have to say I really liked it. It strikes me as fresh, well-crafted and natural all at once. I think the three movements complement each other. There’s just one thing I wouldn’t have done – though this is purely a matter of personal preference – and that’s repeating the opening section in the first movement. I know it’s a sonata, but this sort of piece, with such an ‘progressive’ musical character – constantly adding new elements and moving forward – doesn’t need a literal repetition. Besides, the length of the movements is just right. The first movement reminded me very much of one composer: Charles Ives. Mind you, I’m not drawing a direct parallel, as that composer’s textures were quite intense. Well, one always tries to find points of reference. And I love Ives. I found the second movement beautiful – nostalgic at first, and reflective in the second part. And the third… I liked the twist you’ve introduced here, which (this time, YES, in my view) is a neoclassical-neobaroque homage. Congratulations on your work.

Hello, Wow, there was a lot to listen to. I listened to the first two movements, and I realized that the third movement you have already posted. I did not look at your introductions prior to listening the piece. I saw a previous poster mention that the 2nd movement was devastating. That was it. So I went in blind. I can see now the meaning/introduction behind your pieces, which is always interesting to do after listening to something blind. I liked the second movement the most. I would not use the verb devastating. I personally had this really heavy feeling in my chest as I listened to it. There was sort of crushing feeling that I got from the piece. I followed along the sheet music and wrote comments here and there. For measure 62 I wrote nice, it almost sounds a bit Chinese? Being Chinese myself, I can't help but notice parts of music that sound even remotely asian. I really liked measure 78 to 81. I also really liked measure 117 to 120. The first movement is a bit bananas to me. I also followed on the sheet music and wrote notes from beginning to end. The song starts of sort of in a heroic sense, very exciting to me. Measure 36 was a bit of relief in the sense that my ears got some easy to follow musical ideas. Throughout the song I could hear tidbits of what I can assume is the main theme. So, perhaps I am getting better at listening to your style, or it was simply more obvious for this piece. I wondered if measure 110 was actually playable? On measure 342, I wrote "nice". Overall, these three movements seems to have this natural cadence to it in terms of rhythm and overall direction (up/down etc). However, 70% of the time the harmonies are just really confusing. It has this sort of unsettling effect to listen to. It almost feels like someone breaking the rules of music harmony on purpose and just enough to troll around. But once in a while, there is this really nice moment where perhaps the preceding dissonance really sells that moment, and the pay off seems worth it. I personally prefer your slower compositions. I don't know that I would voluntarily listen to movement 1/3 ever again. However, I think I would want to listen to movement 2 more. I really like it. I don't think that I've really listened to a lot of music that has your particular style. Could you cut some stuff out and tighten movement 2? Sure, I am listening to it, the feeling of chest tightness comes back. And as I listen to movement 2 again, there is this sense of sweetness to the piece. How can something be crushing and sweet at the same time? I don't know, but I think you wrote something that captures that feeling.

Hello, I didn't know much about music theory when I started composing around age 12/13. I am in my late 30's now, and still writing. Never took a lesson in music theory, but I am more interested in music theory these days. If you write music long enough, you will notice the patterns yourself and if you pay close enough attention to what you are doing, or willing to take risks you will eventually pick a few things up on music theory. One obviously does not need to know music theory to compose music. As people have pointed out...it does depend on what kind of music you intend to write. You have gotten extreme good advice I think. I will give you some advice from my perspective. I think that if you intend to pursue music as a hobby, it might be fun to simply use music theory as an adjunct to your purposes. Here's what I mean by this: In my opinion, so much of western tonal music (there is so much out there that is not conventional western music like traditional folk music, instruments that use microtuning etc) is sort of "figured out". To me, music theory is simply a map that intrepid and pioneering composers have drawn out and analyzed/labeled after their own efforts in exploring the music landscape. To embark on your personal journey, you probably don't need the whole map, but it might to help to have some starting spots. Your starting spot will likely come from the type of music you find personally compelling. Of course, if you are thinking about being a professional musician/composer I think that music theory may not be technically necessary (especially if you are a genius!) but extremely useful. Once again, if you are just here for the fun...I think that it's nice to explore the musical landscape yourself through composition. There have been many times that I found something that I thought was mine while composing only to realize that the "greats" of music have already explored these concecpts and often time explored them more carefully than I had done so. As I go older, this feeling of finding something new started to become more and more rare, and so I started to try to actively learn more about it. The older I get, the more I appreciate all the musical worlds and maps that have been discovered before me. But that's part of getting old I think. It's very normal to be young and want to conquer the world. I think most of have been there to some extent :) Hope you keep writing and learning and sharing! EDIT - some spelling errors, whoops.

Hello A few weeks ago, I was discussing the characteristic features of the 20th-century neoclassical style. I wrote a short minuet incorporating these features. A playful style, based on the 18th-century minuet dance, with broken accents, clean lines, bitonality, unexpected modulations... MINUETO_luis.mp3 MINUETO_luis.pdf

Hello @Seni-G! I’m glad you posted this, because I’m currently studying sonata form, and it’s a good exercise for me to review it. You described the first movement as “a bit like an over-stuffed burrito”, and I must say, that was pretty close to my first impression. I still have trouble wrapping my head around it, though the structure feels clearer after a few listens, as another review noted of your Rondo. I do hear a lot of intriguing motivic development going on. I think one thing that makes it difficult for me to evaluate is that it keeps hinting at classical functions that create certain expectations for resolution or how things will continue, and then not fulfilling these expectations. Another thing I notice is that new material tends to grow in spurts from previous material, before the listener can track them. I would say that the form itself seems more self-multiplying than teleological. Again, these are more of observations rather than criticisms—my biggest critique is probably the length of the movement (430 bars!). I think there’s a certain overabundance of material that could be trimmed down effectively. There’s definitely a lot of great material and potential, but I think listeners would be able to take it better in a more condensed form. On to the second movement. Some may disagree, but I think this part is where your idiosyncrasies that I had trouble in the first movement really shine. While it’s definitely the most radical, for me it’s the highlight of the work. I find it both devastating and soothing. It’s like a tabula rasa after the organized chaos of the first movement, where half-remembered memories and desires coalesce and evaporate, the elusive fragments gradually gathering into something slightly more concrete. Absolutely beautiful! The third movement gives me a somewhat unsettled feeling, because of how much it contrasts with the previous movements in every way. On its own, or as part of a different sonata, it would work quite well. But in this context, it makes me wonder how it answers the question that the second movement posed—it seems almost naive in relation to what preceded it. I think you should seriously consider separating it from the rest of the work, and replacing it with something else. Or not—if I were in your position, I would probably keep the sonata at two movements, like Beethoven’s Op. 111, perhaps with some minor modification of the second movement. Just a suggestion! This analysis has made me really interested in your work, though. I hear a distinctive voice coming through, or maybe something more than a voice—a certain way of looking at reality. What are your musical influences? I noticed an emphasis on motivic development, that seems to be from the Beethovenian tradition, as well as some jazz undertones. Debussy, or even Boulez came to mind, though your music’s really its own thing. Good luck with your composing! I’m excited to see what developments your music will make.

@ARCMusicPublishings You’re absolutely right in that I did not wish to convey a “dismissive” attitude. When I post feedback on works here, i primarily look for two things: The intentions and approach to the work. If this isn’t provided, I ask to inform my feedback. The score: this helps inform whatever feedback i may have. All of this ties in with the way in which I seek to provide feedback: What is the story being told, here? How is that narrative constructed? What are the strengths and limitations? What recommendations might I have? In this case, I had neither to work with but a 13 minute long audio file, with individual movements at least timestamped. This is why I asked the creator to share this, but unfortunately was not forthcoming with that. Some general advice to those listening: I would really recommend anyone posting content on this forum for constructive feedback to make explicit this kind of important information at the outset, not only in courtesy to the reviewer but also to give your own music the attention it deserves. Otherwise they leave it up to the listener to work it all out, which risks not only to diminish engagement but also misinterpreting or under appreciating the music itself. And while it is true that I have my own musical preferences, I make a lot of effort to keep that out of the foreground. What matters most to me is how effective the narrative is. If there is no narrative, I would seek to justify that, such as your point regarding background music. I don’t feel however that this was purposed as such. There are too many prominent motifs, apparent contrapuntal textures and dissonances, in my estimation.

OK. They’re different things. I don’t think these systems can be compared because their foundations are very different. That doesn’t prevent them from being used in combination or simultaneously. What I said in my previous message applies to anything in music. If you introduce something completely unrelated to what’s playing—suddenly—and it doesn’t reappear… it will be perceived as a mistake. That’s why, if I were to do something like that (and I know I’ve done it many times—after all, modal exchange in tonal harmony is based on this very principle), I would combine both systems as the piece unfolds, so that it doesn’t sound strange. Repetition in music gives a piece familiarity, coherence, and memorability. Another way to do this—though I think it goes beyond what you’re aiming for, since it sounds much more radical—is what was common in Bartók’s music: polymodal chromaticism. That is, writing simultaneously in two modes. One can be tonal and functional, and the other can be non-tonal. Here: BARTÓK: CROMATICISMO POLIMODAL

Apart from you there's always one guy who can never get "Better than Thatguy" badge: @Thatguy v2.0 himself lol!

Allow me to offer my interpretation: When it comes to the basics of music composition, there are two fundamental concepts/ vocabulary: Melody and Harmony. Melody describes the side-to-side motion of music. Harmony is the up-and-down motion of music, aka chords. Think of Twinkle Twinkle Little Star, or of your favorite movie theme; what you might notice is that you can sing or hum the tune pretty close, however can you also sing the chords? Most likely, the answer should be no, as chords contain multiple notes played together/ at the same time, which is something the average person cannot do. Thus, when it comes to creating a melody or adding harmony, we tell our brain to think in one or two ways. As Markus was describing, the entire ensemble plays the same note/ pitch a lot. Straight away, looking at beat one of measures (mm.) one and two, both Violins and Viola play the same pitches: Bar 1 = F4 (F above middle C), Bar 2 = D4 (D right next to middle C). When played live by a quartet, you'll immediately hear that the music doesn't sound "full" or "rich," instead, it will just sound like the same note distinctly louder than the cello. If you want the ensemble to sound full, you need the instruments to occupy the other pitches of a chord. Since you say this work is in D-minor, then immediately in the opening chord, we expect to see D-F-A. However, your chord is missing an A-natural and the result is a thin sound. To give body and foundation to the opening bar, add an A-natural in the Viola, and move Violin 2 down to D-natural. By making a change such as this, you will make the opening chord strong and resonant; to add, with F-natural being in Violin 1, it will naturally stand out and draw attention to the instrument versus having three instruments do the same thing. Now apply this thinking to other measures in the work. Instead of doubling pitches and repeating things, try to fill out the instruments by making them sustain different pitches of a chord; allow them to be unique and enjoyable. Attached on this comment is my educational PDF, and mp3 for the examples, on understanding Melody and Harmony. It was made for a different user, so please excuse the pronouns or context in the latter half of the document. (Which I need to update). PDF-Undstanding Melody.pdfPDF-Undstanding Melody.mp3

Opposed to orchestral percussion, percussion ensembles usually get alot more room, which allows them to position instruments where its easy to transfer. Also mallet bags assist with this. Truthfully the rule about giving alot of time for percussionists is only if you do not know what their set-up will look like. However if you can calmly and easily switch in a quick time, then there is no issue.

Welcome all. I'm back with more of Frank Bridge's "Fairy Tale". This movement was really fun to orchestrate! I thought tuba and contrabassoon would be good choices for an ogre. Hope you enjoy. Bridge - A Fairy Tale 2. The Ogre (orchestration) #14.mp3 Bridge - A Fairy Tale 2. The Ogre (orchestration) #14.pdf

I agree with @Lithl that this is a piece that would really excel if performed in a noisy and crowded bar! It feels improvisational, and yet has very noticeable form. Clearly you put a lot of thought into this. The combo of improvisational sounds mixed with a crisp form and clearly thought-out main theme all combines to make this music really pop! I’m excited to check out the other preludes. Nice work!

Hello I agree about the glockenspiel – it’s very, very piercing. So it should be reserved for moments of great brilliance or when the whole orchestra is playing at full volume. Or used very sparingly. But there’s one thing I’d like to mention. And that is that, for me, using a set of notes like this isn’t limiting at all. The possibilities offered by using something like this are limitless. It’s simply a framework to build upon, just like a major or minor mode, or a thousand other things.

Hello, It's been a blast listening to all your pieces for the past few weeks. I joined this forum many years ago when I was a "young composer". Writing music has always been a hobby of mine, though I am no longer a "young composer". I have a career, I have a family and I have kids. So, this is a song about my two boys. I wrote a set of 14 piano pieces for my kids meant to be played as a set last year. I've been working on getting the sheets engraved nicely and making some nice recordings at home on a grand piano. This one is called Kid's Perfect. It's a bit of a play on words I guess. The idea behind this piece is that I'm just messing around with perfect fifths. The twist is that I challenged myself to only play 6 sequential perfect fifth notes in any bar/phrase. So, it all starts with FCGDAE, or the first 6 notes of the C major scale rearranged, or a D minor 11 chord. I guess it's all the same thing in some ways. But I try to make it a bit more interesting later on. Thanks for listening, and let me know what you guys think. If you crank the volume up, you get to hear the rich harmonics that resonate in the piano sound board. https://youtu.be/U4IetXzY2Us

Hello, composers of the forum! I’m curious if anyone’s acquainted with the work of Swedish composer Franz Berwald (1796-1868). His music wasn’t received well in his own lifetime, and he had to take other jobs to support himself. Liszt praised his work, telling him “You truly possess originality, but you will not enjoy success during your lifetime. Nevertheless you must persevere.” This Symphony in C major, never performed until sixty years after his death, is full of harmonic color, and formal innovation, not least in its merging of the Scherzo and slow movement into a single movement. I definitely hear it as an early precursor to Sibelius, and it has some lovely and quite striking moments. What do you think of it?

That was lovely! It was somehow both serious and playful, which is, I suppose, what good parenting can sometimes look like. Well done, and great performance too!

Hey @Markus Boyd ! I thought I would just add my 2¢ with regards to the question of how to end your piece. There are lots of options! I don't recommend a fadeout since it would be the cheapest and easiest. I personally also don't hear your current ending as a mistake. The only thing that's a bit out of character for the rest of the piece is the picardy third itself. It you simply changed that E natural to an Eb at the end, it would go a long way towards remedying the problem. I have taken the liberty of making my own version of your ending based on @Luis Hernández 's suggestion of using a kind of Phrygian cadence: AncientRuinMB.mp3

@Lithl I agree with your comments. I had considered lengthening the opening, actually. I couldn’t quite pull it off but there must be an effective way to extend the idea. It’s interesting that you and @Luis Hernández expressed disengagement with the ending, that is the first and only genuine tonal cadence. My rationale was an attempt to somehow merge the tonal and modal into a simple and relatable narrative: anguish first, uncertainty in direction that follows, before a somber finish with a picardie third cadence that offers some form of renewal. That was the concept, anyway. I can certainly play around with it more, but i have a question… If a tonal conclusion is not satisfactory for this type of music, where the expectation is perhaps sustain ambiguity above all, how should it end? I am aware of layering technique in this genre, where essentially in the latter sections the music just falls away - disintegrates if you will - as a collapse. It leaves not resolution but a lingering unease. In the ‘more’ tonal music of Jeremy Soule, he sometimes ends the music with a central motif but with ‘messy harmony’ with ‘sonorities’ that correspond not with the harmony but contribute towards a lush atmosphere that sounds beautiful but does not make much logical sense. I’ll share it, if you want to hear.

Hello everyone. I have two very different pieces I'd like to show you guys First is my etude in E major, which I composed a few months ago. The overall form is very much like chopin etudes, but the harmonic language, particularly in the b section, can become more like late liszt or even impressionism. The main exercise of the etude is a focus on voicing and keeping the fast right hand very light, which is difficult since the voiced notes are double stemmed with the 16th note arpeggiated-like figure. The right hand can also get a little awkward in certain parts, the left hand requires specific articulation, and I even wrote the piece using 3 staves. The pedaling is also a big challenge, and I myself struggle with it as you may hear in the recording. With all that said, while I believe it’s very musically difficult, it is definitely nowhere close to the harder chopin and liszt etudes technically, but I hope you found it interesting to listen to and let me know what you guys think. Heres my recording: https://youtube.com/shorts/_oecn04h1xg Then this is my second etude in C# minor, the one after the one in E major, which is more recent. The main challenge of the etude is maintaining a cantabile melody in the left hand thumb (and index finger), alongside a smooth rolled chord gesture in the same hand, and a rapid, but light, right hand with a 10 note tuplet in 32nd notes, which acts as a sort of ostinato. As you can tell from listening to the piece, it is very different from the first etude, which was more chopinesque in form, lisztian in harmony (particularly mid period liszt), and slightly impressionistic in texture. In this etude, however, I decided to expand further on the impressionistic aspect of my writing, experimenting with these flowing textures and ambiguous harmonies through devices like polyrythms and tuplets, changes in meter, the arpeggiated like flow of the right hand ostinato, having two different time signatures with the same number of beats working together in measures (for example having 12/8 and 4/4 or 9/8 and 3/4 together, and ravel does exactly this in “une barque sur l’ocean” in his miroirs), as well as using extended harmonies and other other random harmonic stuff i figured out through hearing these composers and improvisation which may be too difficult to explain in this text lol. Anyway, I had a lot of fun with this composition, I learned a lot of new things through it, I hope you enjoy it, and let me know what yall think. Here is the recording: https://youtube.com/shorts/JzwQNJA4yO8 Etude in E major - Full Score.pdf Etude in C-Sharp Minor, No 2 - Full Score.pdf

Hello. A super interesting topic that could go a long way.... First of all, let me say that your short piece sounds very beautiful and I love it. I would only change one thing, which I will comment on later. I’m definitely going to say it here: I consider myself quite deeply involved in these matters of modality; in fact, my own curiosity led me to write a mini-manual where I explain how to develop musical systems from a scale-mode (any of the hundreds out there). The first thing to point out is that I think it’s a mistake to compare modal systems with tonal ones (and these with atonal ones). We need to forget about voice leading, 'forbidden' parallels, etc.... Modal music predates tonal music by more than a thousand years, and it didn't need any comparison. It must be understood as a horizontal, melodic system where there are no notes to avoid, and where certain colors (characteristic notes of the mode) are highlighted. The fact that we use chords in modal harmony today is a much later 'construct' in which the concept of the triad-chord is applied to the vertical coincidence of melodic lines in modal music. That is how harmony was born... From our perspective, since we are already familiar with functional-tonal harmony (which has thoroughly saturated our brains), we can approach a composition from an extremely wide spectrum. You can be purely modal, purely tonal, or a varying mix of both. Anything goes. In your composition, and based on your comments, one can sense a hesitation that comes and goes, which is more conceptual than musical, since the piece is completely valid and effective. But let me comment: the beginning establishes a C-G drone... typical modal style. It doesn't matter that you haven't introduced the third. The very moment the first Db note sounds on the violin, you are defining some mode of C Phrygian. In fact, it is a note that is heard at many points. If you were strictly following C Phrygian, the notes would be C, Db, Eb, F, G, Ab, Bb.... However, in measure 4, we see an E natural in the bass, then an F#... These can be interpreted as approaches to the following notes they resolve to... A typical tonal concept. In tonal music, notes resolve; in modal music, they don't—they are there to provide color. You want to use notes outside a scale-mode? There is no problem at all. It's just like using chromatic notes in a tonal composition. The problem is that if you want to maintain the color, the specific flavor of a mode, you have to be careful not to use tonal-functional resources that easily destroy that 'modal framework'. And that is what happens at the end of the composition, where there is a ii - V - I pattern ending in C major, which, for me, cancels out everything that came before. I insist that one can do whatever they want when composing. But our ears are so contaminated by tonal music that this progression ending in a perfect cadence G - C.... takes you right back to any period of the common practice. Especially the B-C..... That sounds like leading tone-tonic anywhere. But like I said: very beautiful music.

You have created a guide on harmony! Awesome! So many of us are prepared to impart knowledge and experience without a single penny. I think such things are a wonderful testament to the commitment and passion of this community.

Hello @Thatguy v2.0! I enjoyed this piece! It has a kind of blues atmosphere. Playing in a bar with some drinks, people-watching, and having fun. I especially like the 0:46 section and the one starting from 1:42; this piece is intriguing. Since this is so well composed, I feel like I will probably never be able to get the "Better Than Thatguy" badge, haha! Thank you for sharing! Best, Lithl.

Hi @GMoneywroteasong ! I think you should just keep the meter displayed as 13/8 but change how the 8th notes are beamed/grouped in your piece accordingly in each bar. I think this also allows you to have different instruments group the 8ths notes differently specific to what they are doing. I once wrote a piece that was in 5/4 but with many instruments playing in two groups of 5/8, each half of the bar being grouped again differently depending on the specific situation as 2+3/8 or as 3+2/8. The only problem I see is that of such a piece being conducted. In my case, the conductor would still conduct the piece in 5/4 as that was the displayed time signature. But the individual instruments would be encouraged to count the piece in 5/8 if their part was displayed that particular way. In your case you could display your rhythms like so: The notes are clearly grouped, and even if not using 8th notes can still be grouped according to the beat lengths you described, regardless of what kind of particular rhythm they might be playing. Hope this helps!

I listened twice, and you managed to put a smile on my face. You evidently know your stuff for it is very well crafted. I have no constructive feedback with regards to your writing. Keep up the good work. Looking forward to the next upload. ;)

Hey Tristan, Apologies for the late reply to your request for comments. I listened to the majority of it and evidently there is a lot to unpack. I see @MK_Piano has already done a great job with the technicalities and orchestration, and even made some voice leading suggestions where needed. I don't feel I can or should add anything further to that. I am, however, interested in your inspiration for such a mammoth of a project - what were your influences and aspirations? And how do you feel it fits together? My won impression is that, stylistically, it seems a quite erratic. With all due respect, the part writing and orchestration seems a little immature and makes me wonder whether you are ready for writing such a large scale work. That said, your harmonic progressions, in several places, sound influenced by the Viennese and proto-romantic schools. I am well acquainted with Mozart's piano concerto's, for example, and I heard some resemblances.

Hello, It's a nice waltz. It's always great to hear live performances of original works! It's perhaps a bit short...leaves me wanting a bit more :) Thanks for sharing!

What is Neoclassicism? I get the impression that many of us have the wrong idea about what Neoclassicism is. I often come across comments in posts such as: ‘Ah, this is in a Neoclassical style’, or even the composer themselves might say that their work is Neoclassical. But writing a piece that is reminiscent of Mozart, to take him as an example, is not the same as creating something Neoclassical. It is simply imitating, with varying degrees of success, the Classical style. Neoclassicism has a specific origin, a particular period (roughly 1920–1950) with its own historical background. And most importantly: it has its own defining characteristics. Without that, we are not creating Neoclassicism, but merely imitating the style of the 18th century. There are a great many composers who, at some stage in their lives, composed neoclassical works. To name a few off the top of my head: Ravel, Stravinsky, Prokofiev, Poulenc, Bartók, Hindemith, Falla, Copland, Milhaud, Honegger, Chávez. And there are marvellous works by all of them – symphonies, operas, piano pieces, and so on... If you’re interested, we can discuss these characteristics and works. Best regards.

Becoz there ain't no fairy tales in modern world now lolol 😝 Also it reminds you drinking more milk lolol

Hello, Sometimes the problem with writing so much music is that it takes so long to listen to it all. I have been listening to the your pieces gradually in the last few weeks while at work to try to take it all in. I think others have made more specific comments, I'll just say a few things about overall impressions. Maybe there are more thoughts after...but I think when you've created something like this - it sort of takes on a life of it's own. I mean from the most fundamental level, I find your music interesting to listen to and I enjoyed listening to it multiple times. So in that regard, from a subjective perspective, I am a fan. I dig your style. The opening notes from your first prelude sort of says: This is Classical music, but the chords are gonna be a little spicy at times. Which is great. Listening to your music feels familiar enough for me, but also exciting enough through the nice harmonies and ideas you got going on. It's clear that you have put a lot of thought into it all. The pacing works great. I'm thinking that the 10 pieces need to be played in this order. So the second thought is...can you actually play these compositions yourself? It gets very virtuosic at points. I would absolutely love to hear a recorded version of yourself playing it. I think there is only so much that comes through in these simulated recordings. The third thought is that you clear have a style that shows through. Prelude 5 goes a bit off on a tangent stylistically from my ears, but I mean I think I hear a distinct "SergeOfArniVillage" style if that makes sense. My favorite is probably Prelude 7. The right hand accompaniment that you do throughout is so nice. Really tickles the right places in my brain, if that makes sense. While you have the "loud" songs and the "soft" songs. I think I prefer the more quite and contemplative ones. I also enjoyed Prelude 9 very much. Probably my second favorite. I'm a big fan of adding descriptive titles to your pieces. I totally get if that's not your thing, but it would be so amazing to hear your own thoughts on what inspired you and what you were sort of going for when writing these pieces.