Leaderboard

@CrystalCanon I completely agree that neoclassicism is a continuation (following a hiatus of more than a century). Of course, these composers looked to everything that came before, in response to what they considered “chaos” in the 20th century. But what prompted me to start this thread is the fact that many people automatically label music as neoclassical simply because it sounds like 18th-century music even though it was composed today. And that’s not the case. Neoclassicism has its own (new) characteristics. It uses dissonance—sometimes very subtle, other times blatantly so—along with polytonality. It employs surprise through rhythms and/or accents that become irregular and ever-changing. It shuns the idealized beauty of Classicism and seeks instead a sense of detachment and intellectual order (many composers omit violins for this reason). Here’s a very clear example:

Thanks for sharing @Alex Weidmann! I’m not qualified to comment on the orchestration, but I really love Koechlin’s colorful sense of harmony and sonority. It reminds me of Mompou in some ways, though less static. I’ll have to dig deeper into his work…

Hi @PeterthePapercomPoser! I really enjoyed your short piece, with its flowing polyrhythms. It has a distinctly nonwestern sound to it, perhaps some gamelan influence? It’s definitely its own thing though. I find it interesting how seemingly arbitrary constraints can help define successful and engaging music. As Stravinsky wisely said, “Whatever diminishes constraint diminishes strength”. While I’m not superstitious, I also find it artistically stimulating to think of music in symbolic terms. For example, I naturally each pitch with a specific color. Besides, composers already tend to associate musical themes with concepts in individual works.

Hello everyone! I’m happy to be posting my first piece on this forum. It’s a short and unpretentious waltz for piano in A major. After a couple years of much reading and sketching, but without a single completed work, I decided to revive one of my old ideas, with the encouragement of my best friend. It took me a little over a week to complete, during a vacation in Paris, and it’s very satisfying to be able to put a double bar on the end! I’m dedicating it to my friend, who plays the piano herself, and now lives on the other side of the world. It’s in a very tonal and functional idiom, and I had no intention of making the piece stylistically distinctive, though I think a few elements of my personal style definitely found their way in, such as a certain motivic organicism, and penchant for harmonic variety. Any feedback is greatly appreciated! (Sorry for the bad recording—I figured it was still better than the MIDI output, especially since I don’t know how to configure dynamics playback in Dorico yet). Home recording - Waltz A major .mp3 01 - Full score - Waltz in A major.pdf

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.

Hi to all 😀 This work is loosely connected to my last post "Chills". As I wrote the piano version of that piece, it brought to mind the style of Charles Koechlin. So it seemed fitting to make an orchestration of one of his lovely piano miniatures. I wonder how many of you have never heard of him? (I hadn't until recently!) I've posted two versions below: 14 has a different woodwind arrangement of the opening passage, and a percussive hit added in Bar 8. I wonder which you think is best? As usual it's a rough score, intended for midi only. I haven't got round to adding slurs, and the 1st Violin passages would probably make more sense if I split them across 2nd Violins and Violas. The original piano piece can be found in the You Tube link below. Koechlin - Roses Au Soleil De Midi #14.mp3Koechlin - Roses Au Soleil De Midi #11.mp3 Koechlin - Roses Au Soleil De Midi #14.pdf Koechlin - Roses Au Soleil De Midi #12.pdf

I declare my interest to join this competition

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

Thanks Mark. Hopefully I've converted you to Koechlin! Many of his pieces can be found on You Tube, as well as an interesting documentary about his life and works.

Hi I listen to the original piano work; although your orchestration is full of color and is well thought out and quite enjoyable. The orchestra version from my mind when compared to the piano is not as ethereal/light or distinct as the original piano version in feel. I guess orchestrating from piano is not easy at all. Mark

Once again very nice sounding work ....

Alex, this is a lovely work. My only observation/suggestion is all the doubling in the woodwinds. When playing with multiple persons tuning the octaves among the players takes a bit finesse. Mark

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.