Leaderboard

Subject: Honest Feedback Requested: Lithl - Swarm of Sound (Polytempo & Polyrhythm) I would like to hear your honest thoughts on my piece, "Swarm of Sound," without any flattery or sugar-coating. I don't mind harsh criticism at all; in fact, I would find it very helpful. This was submitted to the Sonuscore Competition. (While the music was not originally composed for this contest, the video was created specifically for it, so it differs from the actual original concept.) It was rejected, and I want to know exactly why it failed, where it fell short, and whether it even functions as "music" at all. Please provide your feedback without any compromise . =The Concept= Idea: The piece was built around the imagery of a massive swarm of percussion with strings.While the result bears a slight resemblance to Ligeti's Requiem: II. Kyrie. Molto espressivo, it was created primarily out of curiosity—specifically to see what would happen when stacking polyrhythms in polytempo based on my initial imagery. =Compositional Elements= A. Polyrhythm: Based on the concept of using 12 notes in the strings, I chose a 3:4:7 ratio (resulting in 12 notes per cycle). B. Polytempo: The above polyrhythms will be performed in polytempo.I determined the tempo based on a manually drawn graph. There are 12 sections; each new tempo is added as the previous cycle ends. The tempos are based on integer ratios rather than simple multiples, progressively getting faster. C. 12-Tone Strings: To evoke the "swarm" image, I used all 12 tones. Strings are triggered simultaneously with the polyrhythmic/polytempo timings and held until the next note is played. Furthermore, the strings are layered in octaves. This ensures all 12 tones are constantly sounding to heighten the sense of chaos. The strings are played with tremolo. D. Aleatoric Selection (Dice): To remove personal bias from the note selection, I attempted a randomized system based on simple rules (inspired by John Cage). Specifically, as shown in the video, I created a table using dice to select the notes. This makes it more chaotic and hopefully creates a kind of swarm of sound. =Final Note= I submitted this because the timing coincided with a contest held by Sonuscore, a major strings library developer, but consequently, It was rejected. While the other entries were undoubtedly wonderful, I am left wondering if this rejection proves that I lack talent or that I am merely producing self-indulgent noise that provides no value to the listener. If that is the case, I intend to change my approach immediately upon receiving feedback. Please be blunt. I am not looking for comfort; I am looking for a harsh, honest critique. I would truly appreciate your rigorous feedback. (Private feedback is also highly appreciated.) Thank you and sorry for taking up your time.

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 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!

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 🙂

Hello YC gang, Below I have attached the first ten measures of arrangement of Meger second Humorquse. The cast is woods in pairs and two horns. Here is what needs to you check for me: Score this as if this this was entry for YC contest. My goals; I want to successfully score for orchestra->check balance, texture, and timbre. Check for engraving errors I have missed. check for instrumation errors Harmony errors etc Reger Humor no. 2 untitled.mp3 Meger.pdf

Hello Tristan: I have these glaring errors in there because I don't play the piano—and when I do, I only use virtual instruments. You are right about that octave; I hadn't considered that it might not be playable. As for those notes that appear to be marked as triplets, they are actually three eighth notes, though they do look like a triplet here. I didn't intend to have triplets there—nor could I have them—because I would otherwise be short an eighth note. Thanks again for your helpful tips.

Hi Tristan! Nice composition! I would say, you have a nice thematic idea. You could have progressed it, though, into d dur or perhaps c dur. As we can see here:. your writing is very messy, although using a notation software. You should know that in composition, you could always use marks such as simile. You also didn't have to keep emphasizing that it is piano and not something else like... Idk... fortississississississississississimo. As you can see, you have decided to make a triplet here at the start. Very creative, but, the problem is the notation. You need to have a 3 on the top of the triplet... Right? Adding on to my point, it doesn't even sound like a triplet, so why did you do like such? I am confused. Also, you shouldn't write ♩=120. Instead, write Italian. More fancy, you know. Write moderato. Write poco allegretto ma non troppo. (etc.). Moreover, some stuff are proving a second Rachmaninov, which is you, because of these.: yep. That is your left hand span... I am surprised. Nice one, welcome to YC, enjoy your time, see you later! -TristanTheTristan Composer

Just had a listen to it. I'm not sure if it's stimulating but I found it funny (in the good way) at times. I can get why it's called "noise": the piece ended, and youtube directly put "Studie 1" from Stockhausen next. I couldn't have told that it was a diferent piece if they were both presented in the same mp3. I would say this is a matter of finding your public. Value is relative, and subjective. There's always a non-zero chance that some may find your work (the one you submitted) interesting or even beautiful. In fact, you can prove this yourself by making something you may find most terrible and sharing it. Sooner or later, someone may appear and praise it. Keep following the path you like. Kind regards!

Hi Lithl, welcome to the forums! As an experiment, I'm sure it's been entertaining and enriching for you. For me, the result is just a noise crescendo, I don't find it interesting at all. The processes that lead to it may be, though. I don't think that what you did proves or disproves that you lack talent. From this alone it's impossible to tell. Talent for what exactly, though? What are you pursuing? Are the other contestants' works similar to yours? How important is it to you to provide value to the listener? Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

Really? That sounds like a very harsh critique. To be truthful, I think your work is good; it simply reflects your good style. Your melodies have a certain melancholic quality, yet they still feel energetic and full of hope—Specifically, in version 80, the first 27 seconds have a bit of a lonely, melancholic atmosphere. But starting with the note at 0:28, it feels as if the music begins to take a step forward with a sense of hope. It’s hard to put into words, but that’s the impression I get. Whether that was intentional or not, your music is capable of telling a story, and I think that’s great. I’m also interested to hear how others feel about it, not just me.

Could you tell me, for example, what kind of criticisms you received? Personally, I think it’s good overall!! If I had to point something out, I’d say the melodic phrasing feels a bit similar throughout, which makes the development feel a little thin. Among the new melodies, I really like measure 90. Personally, I thought it might be interesting to try swapping the left-hand accompaniment of 90 with something like what's in measure 96! By the way, if you don't mind, could you tell me the name of that forum? I’d love to take a look myself.

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.

Hello my dear friend, First of all, thank you for taking the time to listen to my sonata, and I’m truly happy that you enjoyed it. I thought it might be nice to share with you how I conceive these sonatas in my mind. The truth is that I have blended many different elements into binary form with the intention of creating something personal—my own voice through binary form. Structurally, it is indeed binary, as expected. What I do differently is to approach it with a more Classical sense of transitions and dramatic development. So in essence, my sonatas are fundamentally binary, but with a Classical morphology, featuring clear transitions and the sense of dramaturgy found in the Classical era. Harmonically, I would say it is a mixture of many influences—primarily Classical, with touches of early Romanticism. I absolutely love binary form. Domenico Scarlatti has been an incredible inspiration to me, and I decided that I, too, wanted to create a vast musical diary of binary sonatas—works that truly feel like my own personal musical journal. At the same time, this form encourages me to be bolder, more innovative, and more adventurous compared with other genres. Once again, thank you, my dear friend.

Hello @Vasilis Michael It is refreshing to see a binary sonata form. Binary was primarily used by baroque period composers before the proper form took off. In the A section, you would have your primary theme in tonic. Followed by contrasting B section in the Dominant. What makes binary stand out: the lack of transition between the two sections. Or maybe there is one(?) We can tell there are two major sections. One that repeats and one that follows after repeat of first section. Ergo. binary! I love how the main motive is used thorough out the entire piece. It moves so flawlessly. As usually, your writing is on par! I could not hear anything wrong. :)

Hi Tristan, This sounds very nice! I would suggest finding a different composition software to use, however. The spacing of the notes on the page is a bit all over the place, which makes this challenging to sight read. Musescore is a good free option that sorts that out for you automatically. I haven't used Vocaroo, but I understand it has some AI features for editing recordings?

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.

I don’t know why it’s called ‘Cantai’. But I don’t think it has anything to do with artificial intelligence; rather, it means ‘to sing’ or one of its verb forms in various Latin-based languages. What’s more, it uses recordings of real professional singers (soloists and choirs). I’m familiar with that software you mention. And I used to have it, but depending on what you want to do or what your needs are, it’s better or worse for different people. What I like about Cantai is that you write the notes and the text in the same editing programme (MuseScore, Sibelius, Dorico). And that’s it. It uses expression maps for dynamics and so on. You don’t have to work outside the editing programme (in a DAW, or in XML, etc.). Which is fine, if that’s what you want to do

Those are very different things. If I buy a hydraulic press and use it to flatten a stainless steel pipe, obviously I'm morally responsible for flattening the pipe. If that pipe belonged to someone else, I can hardly evade responsibility by saying, "Hey, it wasn't me! It was the hydraulic press!" On the other hand, it's equally obvious that I can't lay claim to flattening the pipe as a feat of strength. If I cry, "Behold my strength!" as I hold the flattened piece of steel aloft, I am quite rightly met with, "Uh... you didn't do that. The hydraulic press did."

Hey there! I am new to this forum and would like to present my piano ballad (version 86). It was critized strongly in another forum, mainly because of the piano melody. The piece isn't completed in full. From 1:53 on the dynamics of the topline strings aren't edited yet. Because of the many critics I composed 3 new piano melodys (version 90,96,101). What is your hearing impression? How do you find the 3 melodys? Piano Ballade_86.mp3 Piano Ballade_90.mp3 Piano Ballade_96.mp3 Piano Ballade_101.mp3

For the first time in my life, after watching a few harmony videos, I wrote this waltz. I'm curious to hear your opinion. https://voca.ro/1juGRRVoFhLh Walzer in G-dur.pdf

I thank you very much for your vast explanations. Now I can understand much better what the people meant with their critics. This initially should be an job from my sync agent. This youtube song was the example. Wanted was something in this style. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8AAacIL3LM The track in the video has almost no melody. While the devoplemt of my piece I created a melody and I thougt with a melody in my piece it would sound much better.

Thank you for your honest opinion. That is exactly what I wanted to hear. To me, if a piece is not found "interesting," it means it is no different from a mere mess—it is not a work that holds value for others. When I create a work, I don't necessarily have the conscious intent of making it for someone else; rather, I make it because it's fun, and I am satisfied with that aspect. However, I feel that can sometimes turn into a sort of self-indulgence. What I am clearly seeking is to create something that others find highly creative and stimulating. For example, Edgard Varèse’s Poème électronique is a work of so-called "noise," yet it is stimulating and incredibly imaginative to listen to. (Of course, I don't think for a moment that I belong in their lineage, but that is exactly what I am aiming for.) I believe I can only take pride in having created a "great" work—moving beyond simple self-satisfaction—when it possesses the kind of value that makes others feel it is worth listening to. In other words, I am talking about that specific talent. Even if I can create something I find interesting, if it holds no value for others, I feel I lack the talent—or perhaps the ability—to present that value. Of course, I don't think anyone's talent can be fully determined by a single work, but I simply wanted to ask as a point of reference. At least with this piece, I wasn't able to provide any value to the listener; therefore, I suppose it can be classified as a work of self-indulgence. Regardless, your perspective was extremely helpful! Thank you for your valuable input.

It's a German forum. They said things like:"There is no melody." "That's just tinkling." "I can't sing to this melody."

Hellooo, I made this waltz as an attempt to approach music for pedagogic uses. I also tried to give it a 'funny' sound so this waltz uses a lot of dramatic/parodic gestures. I think it turned out pretty good and funny. Hope u like it!!!!! <3<3 ·<{:D Vals I.pdfVals I.mp3

Here another example with text in Latin.

Thank you for your reply and honest thoughts. -Regarding your question Music is a work of sound. Therefore, as long as it is presented as a "work," it is created with some kind of purpose or intention, regardless of whether the sound itself is noise or not. In that sense, the difference between noise and music isn't about the sound itself; rather, it’s about whether that sound has been incorporated into the context of a “work.” If a sound has no intention behind it and is not presented in any form, it is simply noise. However, if it is presented by the creator—or even perceived as such by others—it has the potential to become music. Regarding SFX (Sound Effects), they are not the primary focus but rather a secondary element to the visuals. While they undoubtedly play a crucial role, whether SFX can stand alone as music depends on whether making them so is "meaningful." At the same time, I believe another essential factor is whether the work brings value to the creator or the audience—be it through being provocative, original, or inspiring. Even if you present a sound work with a specific intention, its true "greatness" is objectively evaluated by whether it is genuinely meaningful. That is exactly why I would like to hear your honest opinions on what you all think of this piece.

𝕰.𝕬.𝕾. | 𝕰𝖑𝖊𝖈𝖙𝖗𝖔𝖓𝖎𝖈 𝕬𝖒𝖇𝖎𝖊𝖓𝖙 𝕾𝖕𝖆𝖈𝖊 𝟏+𝟐 French Ambient Electro.mp3 ELECTRONIC AMBIENT SPACE.mp3

This is the best, Intellect! I cannot love it enough!

"Archeangel," is a Fractal Fugue developed from my website: www.atonalfugue.net The matrix is: [0,2,9,3,7,11,4,8,10,1,5,6] It's based on, Webern's Symphony, which has no transformations according to my theory of matrix modulation. It moves at 30 BPM, and follows Mason's rules of composition, albeit serialism, at that tempo. Attached is a complete analysis of the numbers. You can tell, according to the galactic harmonics, how much thought was put into that matrix. I Joke. However, looking at the analysis, there are some interesting inferences: 64. GALACTIC FREQUENCY ANALYSIS ▸ COSMIC ACOUSTIC SIGNATURES Milky Way Frequency Drift....... 0.9305 Andromeda Collision Sonic Reflection 0.5836 Dark Matter Interaction Tone.... 0.2100 Supernova Remnant Frequency Mapping 0.3495 Pulsar Waveform Analysis........ 0.9389 Black Hole Sonata............... 1.0000 Neutron Star Collision Harmonics 0.2377 Galactic Echo Sonification...... 0.6505 This is what I'm jamming on now. It's said that we are composing the very thing that the universe's materials encompass. It's only fair to analyze it as such, too. I mean, we don't have to agree - there is room for independence in what I have to offer in the website. So, what do the numbers mean? Numbers, are often static. When paired with music, the numbers become realized through motion. In this case, as each number permeates through a representation of music, the numbers become more viable. That's expensive to convey, and data intensive; I guess it just means that the numbers are a symphonic glade of information that is easier to ingest than learning about it. I hope it sounds good, in any case. Based on the acoustic signatures, I can conclude that there is a weak correlation to Dark Matter, but there is a strong correlation to Pulsar Waveform Analysis. I do like the idea of Galactic Echo Sonification, in my music too. I hope you have fun with the website, empowering your music, too. Archeangel.mp3 Archeangel.mid WebernSymphony_Analysis_AtonalFugue.pdf

Thanks pateceramics for your review and appreciation of the piece. I am glad you enjoyed it. Thanks also for giving me the idea of caesura markings. I will make sure to consider them as an option in future pieces for solo instruments.

The woodwind section of the symphony orchestra can be categorized into three primary timbral color groups: Cold, Warm, and Hot. This classification helps composers understand how different woodwind instruments function within orchestral texture, balance, and emotional character. By organizing instruments according to their inherent timbral qualities, composers can make more intentional decisions when writing melodies, harmonies, and layered textures. Additionally, this categorization provides practical guidance on instrumental mixing, allowing composers to predict how different woodwinds will blend, contrast, or dominate within an orchestral context—and what kind of sonic result will ultimately be achieved. 1. Cold Timbres: Piccolo, Flute, Clarinet, Bass Clarinet 2. Hot Timbres: Oboe, English Horn 3. Warm Timbres Bassoon, Contrabassoon NB: Due to the dominance of higher and less perceptible harmonics in the extreme upper registers, the timbre of woodwind instruments becomes less distinct. In these ranges, different instruments may sound surprisingly similar in tone color. For example, when the flute and oboe play the same pitch—such as F6—it becomes difficult to clearly identify whether the sound is cold or hot, or even to distinguish which instrument is playing. For this reason, the following graphics and timbral classifications are based on the most effective, practical, and musically “sweet” registers of each instrument, where their characteristic tone color is most clearly perceived and reliably distinguishable in orchestral writing More Information and Free Orchestration Resources: Free Download

Thank you, sincerely, Interlect. This program has been a passion project of mine for the last 3 years. It began with a simple modulator, then transformed slowly to all the features on the site. No, it's not classified information. Since you asked nicely, I can tell you, actually! 😃 So, I've been following Ai and its strength is analysis, while its weakness is physics. Physics, is just not there yet. If you ask Ai to analyze anything, it will give you information that is great to bank off of and further reason with comparable inference. I made this program with Copilot, then Claude, then Perplexity, then Claude Code. Ai kept fabricating my findings with implementation; so if you want to make something like this, do it a day at a time. I didn't use any Altered Chords, but I did create a method that composes with serial intent. Check out the website. It has the ability to export to midi if you want to collaborate with me?

My dear friend, thank you very much for your kind words. I composed this sonata in just a few hours over the course of two days. It was a moment of inspiration, and everything came very naturally. I’m truly very happy that you enjoyed it.

This piece is about a Whale and a Whaling ship, and their corresponding battle, capture of the whale, and bringing it home. I thought this might be an interesting idea for a competition, with a lot of dramaticism inherit, and generally a little easier for a listener to make the connection. Let me know what you think of the piece. I'd love to hear your input on the different textures throughout. I think this piece has some pretty awesome moments and I hope you guys will let me know. Whale and the Whaler (2).mp3 Whale and the Whaler.pdf

Bumping so people can hear the changed endings and edits.

Hi, today I come with a waltz haha. In this piece I wanted that 1-2-3 “waltz” sound in my own style. I composed this in a short period of time so I couldn't develop a variation of theme A. However, I like how it sounds. Someone who listens to the piece said it has a “distorted Beethoven sound” that is interesting haha; what do you think? I hope you enjoy c: Vals No.1.mp3 Vals No1.pdf

This is such nice music! Thanks for sharing 💜 This is such nice music! Thanks for sharing 💜

"Thanks for the honest feedback! I'm glad the music itself sounds good to you. I will try to improve the visual spacing in my next pieces."

"Ambience," is a saxophone feature. The score is attached if you want to attempt the song. Ambience.mp3 Ambience_AltoSaxophone_Harper.pdf

Highly mesmerizing. Highly entertaining. Is this going to be a full fledged show?

Yeah, but look at it like this. I copyright the music before entering it into AI. The AI creates a variation based on my music, therefore it is still mine. IDK, I try to make the AI music as identical to what I compose, too.

@Asgarzade Music School Fancy seeing you here. To answer, Henry question. Possibly yes. :) @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu if you know members who earning to learn this, @Asgarzade Music School is great.

Hi long time for no posting! I decided to post an old work of mine.This Nocturne in C-sharp minor is a juvenile work of me as a 16 year old. I didn't think much at the time of composing, but I did write in the style of Chopin Nocturne then. And then a sudden thought caused me to have a 1st try in fugue in 2:35! I revised the work recently to improve on some voice leadings and transitions except passages after the fugato, but retained as much the original intention as I can as a 16 year old then. The work, even though as immature as it is, does reflect some of my feelings then. Here is the Youtube video and the score of the piece: (Final Draft) Nocturne in C sharp minor.pdf This work can be regarded as in a rondo structure: 0:00 1st part(A), typical Chopin Nocturne texture. Don't know why I modulated the music to F major but the music did so himself... 0:58 2nd part(B) Main melody in F major, but with a new b motive in b.31-32 1:35 3rd part (A') The main melody in the original key can't wait to enter... Gets more agitated and cools down. 2:35 4th part (B'). A fugato using motive b as subject and main melody as episode, modulates once more to F major 3:57 Last part and coda (A''): The A section returns with some registeral change, then gets more agitated. 4:29 is the climax of the piece which is my favourite too, I like the agitation in it. 4:47 starts the coda and finally the mood cools down and ends in tonic major. I played the recording myself. I do make one major slip in 3:22 but the recording is otherwise good enough for me. Feel free to leave comment below! Henry

That's a lot of info dumping...with very valid comments from @Kvothe and @MK_Piano. I am curious if this specific piece was requested by a 3rd party or did you create for your own learning/pleasure? I'm also not understanding your answer to @MK_Piano's question of how you write your pieces? You mentioned keyboard...do you input the notes and everything using that keyboard? Or it does it come with pre-rendered samples and you just mash them together? I'm a noob when it comes to electronic music... As for the piece of music here, it's alright. It's catchy but repetitive and generic. Not really sure how it ties to Alaska...if you didn't have the video posted, I would've chalked it up to random elevator music. If what you say is true about how the media industry works, it's a shame that the craft of a music making to tell the story pioneered by legends such as Korngold, Newman, Williams, etc. is dead.

Hello there! Here is the latest installment of preludes, no.16. This one deals with a lot of two voice counterpoint and a relentless ramble on one theme. As a personal side note, these have been a lot of fun to write, and it's been great simultaneously writing a bunch at once. I had a sporadic burst of ideas when I started this one, and it lead to a lot of spread out writing. I guess what I'm SAYIN' is... more to come! :D Thanks for listening and reading... any comments of any kind are welcome! P.S. some of those tempo markings are to mimic rubato, dunno I suck as an editor Edit: 🔥 @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu 🔥 Prelude No 16 - Score.pdf Henry Prelude no.16.mp3

This is a really fun piece to listen to! The brass writing is top notch. The highlight for me though, was the duetting between the piccolo and flute. Not a combination I would've thought of using. Love the strange sound of the flexatone! Will have to use that instrument some time in one of my future works. I wonder, would it come through as strongly as this against a full orchestra? Or would it need to be amplified?

Nice tone painting so far the orchestration is really nice too A good job with the orchestration and combining slurred and staccato textures together. On mallet instruments it’s a fairly rare use to do doubles. Great job with the accel. Good with using the smaller end of dynamics. A nice with the double reads low double reads with this pattern of single notes staccatos Flexatone that’s really good good use in a professional setting for that. The textures around 105 is really good. I appreciate the dissonance and surrounding force surround it. I appreciate the English horn solo. And good attention to detail with the Bowing. I rarely see non-string orchestra composers incorporate, bowing directions in the score but like that’s good. Circa measure 180 maybe a few measures next there is a engraving error with the suspended cym part good job with voicing parallel fifths it gives the effect that is needed. Good job with this slower parts. solid ending and with full magnitude as well Anyways, I enjoyed this piece a lot. I hope you well and keep up the amazing work.

I have no idea why I did not post this here, but I am going to start up a string of tutorials on my Youtube channel. I talk about tuplets at the very basic level, and why you may want to use them in your writing. Give the video a thumbs up, comment if you wish, and don't forget to subscribe if you want to see more of this type of content from me. Video is really long, but I break all my content up into chapters. I'm open to suggestions on how to improve my videos. For example, if there's too much dead space I can try to make my videos progress a little faster. Or if the videos are just too long, I can break them up into smaller segments. I'm literally experimenting with video length.