Leaderboard

Hello A few years ago, whilst on a course I took on ‘Contemporary Composition Techniques’, I wrote a short piece for piano which I later revised and titled ‘One more try’. Recently, I had the idea of orchestrating it. It is written in a free, non-functional, chromatic style. The score isn’t condensed because the instruments that come in pairs often have very different or distant lines. It’s in concert pitch. Below is a video of the piano version. One more try orch.pdf One more try 2.mp3 One more try 2.pdf

The idea for this composition was inspired by @MK_Piano, after he sent me some footage of himself improvising in C minor on piano. I asked him if I could write something inspired by what he played, and was graciously allowed to do so. The piece utilizes a steady quarter note / eighth note moving rhythm and melody that symbolizes the passing of time during, and the emotional feelings felt in periods of contemplation, longing, rumination, and/or sorrowful reflection. Although, I feel as though it may be a bit too repetative, despite having variation in both rhythm, chord voicing, chord progression choice, including a modulation towards the end. I'm seeking to build upon the ideas I have in this score, more effectively. Any suggestions are welcome :) **UPDATE** Score Files updated to reflect any/all decided changes, based upon suggestions within this thread. 6/23/26 1:25pm EST Updated again 6/26/26 - New score files attached. 34823585 (1).pdf 34823585.mp3

A lighter composition for the early Summer, conceived as an exercise in harmonic development, apoggiaturas and chromatic saturation. Greatly inspired by Chopin's Op. 28 Prelude in E minor. YouTube video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwInFjwKJUo Romantic Prelude in A minor.mp3 Romantic Prelude in A minor.pdf

Hello, I posted an earlier iteration of this work some time ago. A lot has since formed. The general structure of the first movement is complete; I still intend to vary the recapitulation somewhat as I prefer to not simply repeat the second subject verbatim. But it is more or less done. I have also made a start on the second movement. This movement has a slightly unusual disposition and is on the way for becoming an ambitious piece with its emerging structure in mind. I am posting here in advance of completion to gauge people's feelings about the musical ideas. Perhaps if anyone has suggestions I would love to hear perspectives. Or even if you like it, that helps to say too. Composing is otherwise an activity for solitude! Second movement is @ 05:40. Thanks! Markus Symphony in A (Draft).mp3 Symphony in A (Draft).pdf

Hello! I have completed a first listen and looked over the score. I hope to do a deeper dive and analyze the score thoroughly, and the following are my initial thoughts. Very much classical style, and quite refreshing to hear something in that style again. Check your engraving. Over the entire score, you have rests with dynamic markings. Page layout can be bigger or staves made smaller. At least 4 measures per page. There is key information missing from the score. If anything, the number of instruments as well as copyright information. You just say "Flute, Oboe, Clarinet," however, do you intend for more than 1 player for this part? Between the two movements, in Musescore, you can add a "SYSTEM BREAK" which will end the piece and add a pause after a double bar line. On the next page, it will list the full instrument parts again. (in the layout palette) With the literal music, there is more play you can do with the structure or in your accompaniment parts I think. 5-minutes for a classical symphony is on the shorter side and you can mess with the idea of a repeat after the exposition and utilize a 1st and 2nd ending to propel yourself into the development. It's not a "double exposition" per-say, however very common for the music of the time.

Hello! Interesting piece to have listened to. I must apologize now as I have some comments and in an effort to stay concise, I will be blunt. Here are my thoughts: (view on PC if able, not mobile) Double check the alignment of your diminuendos and crescendos. To me, it casts the illusion that the score is a little unpolished: With the slur groupings (two-note slurs), was it your intention to make it an ensemble feature? I saw some spots that have two-note slurs in one instrument, but not the others, even when the gestures feels the same: Measures 2 and 6 (in cello) as one example. Last thing would be dynamics themselves. If cello is the main feature, I think it a little asymmetrical to have the violin 1 be a dynamic marking louder than the melody. Shouldn't the cello be the loudest voice when presenting the melody? With the tempo markings, I think it looks better and easier to read when the text is a font size or two bigger or in bold. As a performer, it helps visually distinct the two text field types. Last few picky things would be measures 8,14 and 21. Why not just use a half rest for the other voices on beats 3-4? For the ending 4-bars, why not write "Sempre diminuendo" meaning "Always Diminishing" or "Morendo" to imply "dying away". Your pianissimo to Niente dynamic is a little messy with the spacing not consistent between all instruments. Final thing is to double check/ update is the idea of adding copyright information and a subtitle to say "for String Orchestra" or "for String Quartet". This helps as on first look of the score, the ensemble size is not mentioned. Good work!

To highlight a few key differences between either piece, in Chopin's prelude the melodic contour seeks minimalism in a way that balances out the listener's focus and allows the left-hand chords to shine and be heard more clearly. However, in my composition, the melody is most of the time merely a product of the top line of the right-hand chords and while it does produce a distinctive effect due to the rhythmic motif and its characteristic contiguously rising and falling eighth note in the 4th beat of its initial measure, it is not a sufficiently distinctive part to be considered, in my view, integrally alienable from the lower voices or the right-hand chord progression as a whole. Well, some earlier pieces of mine, composed almost exclusively for piano specifically, were mostly focused on styles closer to that of this composition than those of my usual production, such as in this post: https://www.youngcomposers.com/t44435/triwaltzia-no-1 You're correct in pointing out the deviation from my usual style with heavy counterpoint. The title, however, was not actually a strict or entirely accurate stylistic descriptor, and instead it purely serves as an indicator of a particular style I sought to emulate from the Romantic era. It obviously does not account for the entire range of styles and genres that this period in the history of Western classical tradition has to offer, but instead builds an association based on the "vibes" of the music, if I may use such a term. I especially agree with your first line of criticsm: the constant reiteration of the same rhythmic motif ending up producing a far too monotonous, repetitive or boring impression was indeed a concern even before this piece was finished. However, every time I tried to vary the rhythms or change the bass, it felt jarringly sudden and unexpected, breaking pattern in a way that not only was far from subtle, but also completely imbalanced considering the listener's expectations after the first couple phrases. Adding a contrasting B section with an entirely different theme might have solved the issue, but I failed to execute such an option in time before the whole piece was nearly complete. The density of the chords doesn't concern me nearly that much. Reducing the number of internal voices in the middle sections seemed to create the same unexpected vacuum I just described, so as long it doesn't get in the way of the dynamic contrast across the piece I personally see no problem with it, since I'm certain any sufficiently skilled pianist would be able to perform those in spite of the uniform chord density throughout. I'm interpreting what you mean by the bass being "underused" as not providing sufficient rhyhtmic or schematic variety, which could just as easily be referring to the right hand chords, just as in your first point. As for the arpeggios, I disagree with the premise that it is merely an effect: it is integral to the motif across the whole composition. I do understand what you actually mean by that, however: it once again comes back to the original line of criticism. The bars you mentioned were unplayable without additional arpeggios merely included a major 9th and 10th. The 10th in question has been edited to an octave for easier performance with a smaller handspan, even though it is still arpeggiated. However, that doesn't solve the rest of the 10th in the 2nd beat of each measure in that sequence, so sorry in advance to pianists with smaller hands: I must admit feasible playability is still not my main priority (ah, what would I do without the wonders of modern technology...) Anyway, thank you kindly for your review and points of criticism. I will most likely take them into careful consideration when setting myself to write compositions similar to this one.

I'm wondering greatly why this piece did not receive any feedback (let alone positive and encouragingly complimentary feedback), even after 3 weeks and more. I absolutely love many elements that have been used in this score: Use of melodic Caliope (Baritone woodwinds, Soprano Strings) background call-and-response (alternating between Violone and Violin/Violinone) moment of introductory climatic moment (the herold of the Timpani's and Double-Bass's dotted-rhythmic march) Just to name the few things. It also invokes a beautiful sense of a late evening walk down an urban city. (I just checked the name of your piece again, and it speaks of the "Frank Bridge"! The setting illustration you were going for seems excellently executed!) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I do concur that arranging 2/4-hand Piano works into Orchestra is quite the arduous and ambitious task. Most people don't realize how difficult it really is to learn idiomatic writing for 30 or more instruments; so that your performers can perform your work at ease and with joy; and your audience can, at the same time, enjoy the listening experience of it. (I have come across a lot of works that is a 'joy' to play, because it's highly idiomatic and "quite easy to perform" with "minimal rehearsal"; but with little thought having been put into the music, which makes the listening experience of it a bit dull and flat. "Boring" music, as some would call it. In short, easy and simple to play; not fun to listen to!) As far as difficulty of instrumental writing is concerned (you brought up your virtuosic pitched percussion lines being advised by Musescore as difficult): a lot of times, it heavily depends on the personal practice (as well as personal incentive and motivation) by individual performers to bring your works to life. From my own experience: if it doesn't sound like how it's supposed to and/or it seems like the performer is struggling and making the music seem too difficult to fully and viably perform.... a lot of times, it's because they haven't practiced the music, and/or they simply need to care about it more. In these instances, it often has minimally or not at all to do with your own fine writing. Just as a composer-to-composer word of reassurance. ;) (Check out my own music score that I posed two days ago! I have spent time writing fairly to greatly idiomatically for many of the instruments; making the line seem 'harder' than it actually is. Yet, the players of its earlier first edition still struggled, when I gave it to a Philharmonic (one of 'the best' in Europe, as it is reputed; especially considering the historic famous composers who had given it premiere music to perform! Not naming names, not naming the orchestra) to performed. Furthermore, guess what?? During the first rehearsal, the dress rehearsal and the final performance that premiered this Tone Poem), it sounded like an intermediate half-learned high-school concert band that's just learning how to get it together. Individual instruments were literally sticking out, and a few sections were quite off pitch, shrill, crass and.... not performing the affects I was intending/asking for. This happened, despite having the music 3 weeks to a month before their final performance; and, they have the MIDI mockup. They were given the resources to make it happen. And, it didn't. It was very embarrassing, seeing that, at the end of the premiere, I had to stand up and take a bow. Forever, that European audience saw my face and will remember me: that it must be me as a composer. After speaking to people later down the line who reviewed the (earlier first edition of this) music, the remark I received was, "....Why was it not performed better?" or "... Why did they sound like that?" "The line is fairly easy and straight-forward to achieve, with some bit of practice." See that? Was it my music, or was it simply that my performers didn't care enough to practice it? I suppose I can diverge into the topic about Philharmonics rolling their eyes when it comes to having to "deal with" new student works (You know, 'here we go again...student works.... let's get this done, so that we can enjoy playing Beethoven and Shostakovich!!'), but I won't get too far off the topic at hand. What was my point in all of this? Your Vibraphone and Marimba lines are likely fine. It's probably regarded as difficult, but that certainly doesn't make it not viable and easy to learn! Really, it comes down to the attitude and the desire by your percussionists to learn and practice it!)

Hello! For anyone wondering, this is the little video I sent him. It is not the original improv I did, however, a visual aid to help with seeing chords and simply for fun: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vOLvUgbz4eGiWmd8e35tuUoJ3TkpUdR0/view?usp=sharing Red99, I will make my own comments later/ soon!

I think transitional periods are very interesting. This is the case with the galant style, which is firmly rooted in Baroque conventions but where dense counterpoint begins to give way to clearer melodies and accompaniment. Something similar happens between the Classical and early Romantic periods. I’m listening to your recommendation of Kraus, whom I wasn’t familiar with (Symphony in C minor), and it’s fantastic. I think the choice of instruments in your symphony is spot on. It depends on whether the approach is more chamber-music-like, as seems to be the case here, where there are many independent lines. As if it were an expanded quartet… It’s true that as soon as you move on a little in the style, chronologically speaking, you already come across flutes, oboes, bassoons and horns in pairs. Besides, if you don’t know what to do with so many instruments, you’re bound to get it only half right. This reminds me, albeit in a different context, of the fantastic versions of Chopin’s two piano concertos with a string quartet or quintet. Although it seems that Chopin himself used this arrangement for the music salons of the time, there are versions arranged by other composers. What I mean is that some pieces lend themselves to different approaches. Others do not lend themselves to interpretations that stray too far from their original spirit. Like when Wagner reorchestrated Bellini’s Norma in a ‘massive’ style, and then disowned his own version (it’s never performed; Bellini requires lightness, not a Wagnerian orchestra). Anyway, I’m getting off topic. Best regards

I’ve listened to the current version. I must say I loved it. And I’ll make a little confession. I like all musical styles and periods, from early music to contemporary. I have my favourite periods (the Baroque and Galant periods, late Romanticism, Impressionism and Expressionism, and in contemporary music, some things I like and others less so). The truth is that when I took the time to study music a little chronologically, I discovered how things develop. I say this because the Classical period is one of the ones that appeals to me the least. I think it’s down to the aesthetic they use, which is somewhat restrained – and well, we all know what this style is like. Your symphony seems to be in the Classical style, with hints of early Romanticism. It’s not that I’m obsessed with categorising things, but it helps to find points of reference. Regardless of that, when someone writes something like this with creativity, inspiration and a lot of hard work behind it, I love it, whatever it sounds like. Here I notice that the orchestra is of an early style; the woodwinds aren’t even in pairs and there are no brass instruments. But the way it sounds, it isn’t really necessary, to be honest. One of the things I’ve really liked is the clarity with which all the instruments sound when they have to stand out against, at times, a denser texture. There’s a moment when the bassoon takes the lead and it’s brilliant (bar 58). There are some lovely moments of counterpoint, such as the woodwinds from bar 20 or thereabouts. I think the score has been very carefully put together. What’s more, the music library sounds brilliant (is it the one from MuseScore?). Best regards.

I think his name is actually Mason..🤣

@Alex Weidmann Thank you for listening. Yes, the piano version is very different – more ‘intimate’, perhaps? – despite that crescendo. I was in no doubt that the brass section was meant for that part... When I orchestrate something that already exists (for piano, generally speaking), I have two options: 1) to be as faithful as possible, which in some cases is almost essential, 2) to recreate the piece for the orchestra. In this case, it usually turns out quite differently.

Hello I was surprised by this piece, which is in a very different style to what I’m used to. I must say that the melody works well and it gives me the feeling of a ballad from a 1960s film. I’m not sure to what extent you’ve worked in these styles, or in styles other than ornate counterpoint. What I notice here is that, curiously, there isn’t much of a counterpoint underpinning, which is nevertheless present in the Romantic period. I think the rhythmic motif, in particular, becomes a bit monotonous after more than 4 minutes. I also notice that the bass is underused as an accompaniment, and that the chords are excessively dense; the arpeggio loses its effect when it’s played all the time. And some sections are unplayable unless you resort to arpeggios again. (bars 8, 9 ...) The idea is good, but I think the overall approach falls a little short. Oh, I’d also like to mention (something I’ve said before) that Chopin’s Prelude in E minor takes a very different approach. The chords are the essence of the piece, due to their minimal movement and the perfect voice leading they achieve.

Bois, lads, (or anyone of persuading affiliation), it is time for this piece to not die! I have found another call for scores fitting the instrumentation requirements in Boston, MA. I have just finished my application and will find out mid or late July. Here's to some success! (Also, updated the score to match new engraving... once again lol)

Hello Everyone! After a brief hiatus from the forum for a much needed vacation and music-recharge, I am back home and beginning to try out new ideas for chamber pieces. I have written a lot of music for large ensemble and wish to dial it back down to chamber and solo music over the course of 2026. The first part in this is to showcase an idea I felt passionate about a few weeks ago. As I began to write it out this week, I feel the flame has kindled and I may not finish/ expand upon it later as I have a lot of ideas I want to explore now in other places. This Fantasie is not as extensive as the classical and baroque styles, however it's a fantasie in the sense of my improvisation with the string quartet. The only thing I wrote down was the first four bars of melody, everything else was what I made in the moment and over the last few days. Let me know what you think and as always, thanks for viewing this post! AUDIO-Fantasie in F#-minor.mp3 SCORE_Fantasie in F#-minor.pdf

Excellent 🗿. Can't help you much with the inspiration thing, but it's a great start. I'll follow the topic in case you drop some news!

Thanks for the comments! In short, we'll see what happens with it. It something I will keep for later, but am unsure the direction I want to take it (Final form, duration, etc.) The main thing that is stopping me is inspiration specifically. While the summer, I am still rather busy and easily distracted currently. To your point about the note duration: It's more-so due to the computer. In performance/ final copy, I'd change it to a staccato and hopefully imply it's just meant to be the landing point of the run.

Unexpected crescendo! It bought me. Not that much the più mosso, but it's still good, yet I feel it could be extended, and each time I listen to it I am more and more convinced, maybe a repeated section or something else playing with the material you have already put over the table would not hurt. That there are no measure numbers is a bit painful to me, but I'll use an image: These notes duration don't convince me too much, specially the first time they appear: I'm not 100% sure why but it's either that the attack of the computer performance that sounds too plain or something else. I think I have little more useful feedback this time. Great job, MK! Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

Well, it's been so long since I was last here! I hope this community has been well since. I’m looking for some nice detailed peer feedback on my first Tone Poem, Myst o' Foryst a Spryng Nyte. It is a 5-part programmatic work written for a large woodwind/brass configuration, percussion ensemble, and features a prominent chamber core of Viola, Double-Bass, and Piano. (My "Alto Piano Trio" ensemble) I would be nicely interested in your thoughts on the orchestration, the pacing of the sections, and how you perceive the overall structural architecture as you listen along with the score. Please tell me of your stylistic impressions of this piece! (Note: this is a computer generated audio RENDER; not a live performance. Some of the techniques were lost in translation when it rendered, so it wouldn't sound correct. This is ESPECIALLY true of the audio files IIa and IIIa. If in a moment something sound so "wrong" and "off" in any of these audios, please rely on what is written on the page.) Thank you for your time and ear! Myst o 'Forest a Spryng Nyte (Composition) - 2nd edition - Audio portion I - meas. 1-149.mp3Myst o 'Forest a Spryng Nyte (Composition) - 2nd edition - Audio portion IIa - meas. 150.mp3Myst o 'Forest a Spryng Nyte (Composition) - 2nd edition - Audio portion IIb - meas. 151-223.mp3Myst o 'Forest a Spryng Nyte (Composition) - 2nd edition - Audio portion IIIa - meas. 224-236.mp3Myst o 'Forest a Spryng Nyte (Composition) - 2nd edition - Audio portion IIIb - meas. 237-275.mp3 A. Chen - Myst o' Foryst a Spryng Nyte - 000 - FULL SCORE (with Conductor's Rhythmic ref).pdf

Hi Luis, For me the most successful part of this orchestration is your highly effective brass writing, especially in Bars 19-22. Overall it reminds me of "5 Orchestral Pieces" Op.16 by Schoenberg. I like the piano version too: I find it atmospheric and relaxing. Surprisingly mellow compared to the orchestral version!

Thanks, Luis. I am definitely being pulled towards early romanticism, and I am glad this is apparent. In recent years I have begun to listen to more Beethoven (generally early Beethoven, though) and his contemporaries (Like Reis, Anton Eberl). But I have also become increasingly influenced by the Sturm und Drang tradition. As such,Kraus Is one current influence, particularly his c minor symphony that Haydn, after hearing, declared Kraus a genius. Sudden dramatic shifts are a hallmark of this style; the intention is often to keep the audience on edge, unsure what is coming next - despite remaining in the 'confines' of common practice. At least in historically informed performance today, top orchestras utilize stacatissimo technique in the strings (especially in the bass) during such moments in the minor that generates a kind of "badass" or "rogue" vibe that conveys an immense attitude that quite often overwhelms my own senses. If you listen to the Kraus, you will hear this effect in the climatic opening from around the 3 minute mark. There is also some late Mozart. I first thought it was derived from Beethoven's slow movement from symphony 1 but is in fact Mozart's Prague symphony (compare the passage from bar 29 of his slow movement with 51 of mine). It essentially serves a modulatory function. Quite often these influences are subconscious and I find only later where they came from. Borrowing should be acceptable provided it is aligned with my own motivic development (hence my own unique spin rather than verbatim that might otherwise be out of place). You have found a weakness of mine. Orchestration is not a skill I have cultivated nearly as much as counterpoint & voice leading. This is why I tend to write chamber music only. Writing this work is intentionally out of my comfort zone. There is brass in this work but is used sparingly. And the woodwind pairings is something I should explore. The main thing is that the voice leading is outlined; the rest should largely be a doubling exercise. I will have to do some studies into this, however. The winds, brass and percussion is the default muse library (the base subscription package). The strings are the 'spitfire' package that cost me around £40.

Hi, UncleRed99. This forum often seems so advanced that I hesitate to comment on others' work, but I saw your Chatbox and decided to take this opportunity to leave a comment. Please keep in mind, I'm just a beginner. Feedback/Impression: First, I tried to look for the video by MK_Piano, which was your source of inspiration, but I couldn't figure out which one it was. As a result, I wasn't able to check how you developed it, though I was very interested. In my honest opinion, while I did feel several transitions and the descriptive scenery based on them just as you intended, the piece felt a bit redundant. Assuming that redundancy wasn't the concept of this work, I felt that adding more dynamics to the left-hand chords could help improve it. The new section starting from 4:16 is wonderful. To me, it felt like a temporary relief and liberation. When I first heard this part, I imagined strings playing in my head :) I didn't have any particular complaints about the part from 4:16 onwards, but as I mentioned earlier, the sections leading up to it felt a bit redundant. I felt this especially during the section starting around 0:30. Also, for the transition starting at 1:52, I thought it might be nice to halve the number of times the left-hand chords are played, or reduce them even more, to make the texture sparser and create a more melancholic atmosphere, and then burst into the open atmosphere at 2:33 all at once. The transition starting from 3:22 felt so abrupt that it seemed a bit disconnected from the concept. I couldn't think of a concrete solution, but I believe a smoother transition would suit it better. The overall atmosphere of this piece is lovely and good. P.S. I'm sorry if these advices aren't very useful, but I hope they help even just a little. By the way, I would love it if you could tell me what plugins you used. Thank you. Best, Lithl.

Yeah, that's the idea and one of the possible changes! However, in this version you changed the melody at the cadence right before. In this new version the melody at the end of the previous section soars higher than in the original one. I think, if you play the melody an octave higher, it is better to keep the melody prior to that in the same range as in the original version, since, otherwise, it breaks the novelty of the higher rang. You could also keep this new melodic ascend at the cadence and that might add some contrast for the entrance of the original melody you had in G5. Also, I think in both versions, one of the main issues is that the Cmin accompaniment chords are too loud. I would make those chords much softer and, in general make that whole section softer than the previous one (both melody and accompaniment, but specially the later). Thiis dynamic change could also help quite a lot.

Hi Luis, To those familiar with my work - and indeed myself - the words, "free, non-functional, chromatic style" might be thought to ring disaster to my ears. Although this is not quite true. I am particularly fond of Ligeti's work (his Six Bagatelles for winds), for example, as well as some early work by Arvo Pärt (see his Pro et Contra). Even madness has its place in my world of listening. For me, what matters most is producing something of character in a way that somehow embodies the human experience in a convincing narrative. I felt you did this quite well, actually. I recognize that the decisions behind the atonal approach, while seemingly devoid of foundational theory, can be intentional rather than a mere free for all. You should develop it more. Will keep a look out ☺️

If I limit myself to works not written by me, one of my favorite orchestral works on this forum is this: Here is also a "classic" favorite of mine by @gmm :

Thank you, Mason. I will amend the score layout this morning. I appreciate this will make it easier to scrutinize for those having a deep dive. The current view and lack of repeats is intention for my own eyes and there is often no point having repeats during this phase of work. But yet, with the repeats the first movement will be at least 10 minutes once I am done with it. You seem to be a guy who knows his stuff. Very much looking forward to your comments. Will check out your stuff too!

Hi everyone! I composed this short waltz for piano today. I'm still practicing it, so for now I've used the sounds from MuseScore 4. It was inspired by Tchaikovsky's Album for the Young, Op. 39. The opening melodic motif is quite similar to that of No. 8, "Waltz," and I also used some harmonic progressions that I learned from No. 14, "Polka." While studying and practicing pieces from that album, I started wanting to compose several short piano pieces and create my own "Album for the Young." This is my first attempt. It is a waltz in B-flat major, although the tonal center shifts around quite a bit. The form is ABA', with A being the main waltz theme and B a slower lyrical brief section in Cmaj. As always, every feedback, comment or suggestion is more than welcome and hope you enjoy it! Thank you!

Hello @Kvothe , thank you so much for all the feedback and glad you enjoyed the piece! You are right, I had not realized until you pointed it out. I decided to change those measures so I modified m.14 and similar measures so now the transition to the contrasting section of A is done without stopping the waltz rhythmic flow. I experimented a little bit with the harmony. In general I am happy with most progressions except for m.7~9 where I do the following harmonic progression: Db7 --> Bbaug/D --> Ebmin. It was a solution I came across for moving from Db7 to Ebmin while having an enharmonic common tone (F#-Gb) in the melody. Yes, I agree. Since I composed it as a short piece I tried to have fun with the main melody (not trying to write sentence, period or hybrid, which I did in the B section instead) but it came out too Jazzy. I do like it but I think it gets too chromatic too early (so I like it the main theme much more during the reprise than at the beginning, once the ear got used to it). I think it is okay for a short piece like this but I am trying to learn ways to "smooth" the way to chromatism in themes like this one. Thank you so much for all the feedback!

Thank you for the clarification :) I will consider it moving forward and update with any changes!

There is a key change but, I was meaning mostly the change of tessitura and texture (in that particular instance, besides changing the key, you leave large gaps between the accompaniment and the melody, which contrasts with the previous measures in which the G staff was clustered with notes). What I meant around 1:50 was not a modulation, but rather a change in tessitura for the melody. I might be wrong, but the same melody is played for the first time around the 00:59 mark, which, at the same time, is a variation of the main melody with which the piece starts. As a result, while my ear does not ask for a key change (the initial Cmin chords from m.34 sound perfectly nice to me), when the G5 sounds, yet once more, somehow my ear is tired of hearing the melody always in that range. I think, at that point, it would really make it much fresher playing the melody an octave higher or even in a bass (with the melody played below the Cmaj accompaniment chord), starting it in G6 or G3. For example, this is a fast draft I made of the initial measures when played an octave higher. Since the melody has already being played in around G5 for a few times, it might make it fresher going up an octave like this. The melody has some fast notes at times, so it cannot be played in octaves easily, but something like this might work at times. octave_melody.mp3 Hope it helps!

Thank you very much dear Henry. I hadn't seen your beautiful comment. I really appreciate your feedback which shows an attentive listening to details. Unfortunately, I lack the time to participate more in the forum but I will try to keep myself a little more informed of the news. Thank you again!

Hi @JorgeDavid, Below is my review of your waltz: Form: There are two district different sections that have their own character with the composition. The tonal centers and relations between is not common. I feel this would fit with in middle romantic period. I am not sure about the dramatic pause at the end of melodic phrase. It is rather sudden and jarring. It disrupts the natural flow of piece. Harmony and texture: There is a high sense of chromatism with in waltz. I wonder about how those harmonies are prepared and resolved correctly. The bass line fits with in the standard waltz type pattern in first section and breaks away in the middle section. Thematic material: A couple things to note: the ending of each melodic phrase with chromatic note seems unsettling. G-F#-A. While there is a sense of melodic sequence with each phrase, it is hard to detect the general structure (sentence, period, or hybrid). This was original piece and was truly creative. With in my musical taste, I like to hear more music like this. I.e. find a way to create a natural flow with each phrase. think about what I said about structure and form and how the works with the underlaying the harmony. Otherwise, you good start. Kvothe.

This is really lovely! I especially love the melodic ideas. However, I agree that it feels a little repetitive at times, particularly before 3:22. I listened without the score, so I can't give much feedback on the harmony itself. From a listener's perspective, I think the piece could benefit from a few more changes in texture here and there. Nothing too obvious, so as not to disrupt the contemplative mood. For example, I really loved the change of texture at 3:22. More moments like that, might help reduce the sense of repetition while still maintaining its contemplative flow. In particular, at 1:52, I found myself wanting to hear the melody an octave higher (perhaps doubled in octaves). As it stands, it presents a variation of the main theme in the same register, and my ears were asking for a change in tessitura at that point. This is really beautiful and an orchestral version would be so beautiful too! Orchestrating it would also give you lots of chances to add variety with the instrumental colors. Thanks for sharing!

This is a short thing I wrote in one day, perhaps a bit self-indulgently expressing my rather, shall we say... mixed... feelings right now about my country as we near the 250th anniversary of independence. The cellos play the melody of "America the Beautiful" while the violins and violas add harmonies that subvert the simple tune. As always, any comments or feedback would be appreciated! Semiquincentennial.mp3 Semiquincentennial.pdf

I'd never written for concert band before, however, that's the only ensemble, aside from one performance, that I've ever rehearsed and performed a production within... So I am very familiar with how the instrumentation is utilized in concert band scores. This was inspired by some work from another collegue of mine, that with their permission, I was allowed to put my own "twist" on it, and it is very very far from it's original form... I suppose that makes it more original than arrangement, but ah. I can't take all the credit for it if I didn't conjure it up myself from scratch. It's very short, and I didn't really have any intent on developing it into a more lengthy, complete piece, despite my desire to do so... I think it's quite extravigant, triumphant and reminds me of a hopeful feeling. I suppose the idea is that it can be used, potentially as an opener piece for a band somewhere, somehow. lol Let me know what y'all think P.S. Yes, I know there are a couple of engraving errors, such as Dynamic marking placements for example. The score isn’t a polished and finished product, 100% as of right now. Just an FYI 😅 Thanks!! -Unc whatliesahead.pdf WhatLiesAhead.mp3

Hello, This modified version flows very naturally and feels more balanced. I also like the fact that the transitions between sections are smooth.

Ah, I see. (I thought Frank Bridge was a landmark; which I hadn't looked up yet. Ha!) Regardless, you brought Britten's advisor's piano music to life. Your rendition of it is quite stunning; and does invoke the urban late night mood as for-mentioned. And, the second portion of my post (regarding difficulty of percussion part) still stands.

Hi, many thanks for the kind words, and thoughtful review. Frank Bridge is actually the composer. (Don't worry, I hadn't heard of him either until very recently!) This is my orchestration of his 3 movement piano work "The Hour Glass". (You can find the other 2 movements lower down in the Orchestral and Large Ensemble category.) Far as I know, it's never been orchestrated before. Frank was a British composer (1879-1941), who mentored the young Benjamin Britten. I think the main issue with the marimba part is whether you can actually physically get round the instrument to play those octave movements at this tempo. And also whether you can find an extra large marimba (and vibraphone) to cover the pitch range required. I'm thinking I'll probably rework those passages so they fall into a narrower range. I've heard those stories about orchestras not taking student works seriously; but what can you do?

As the third installment in my enharmonic perpetual canon cycle, this one follows a procedure nearly identical to that of the first one and is quite similar in duration as well. The lyrics (once again, in Latin) sung by the choir translate as follows: "Change is inevitable in all things. Everything flows in the balance of those who are tempestive." As with the previous installment, the coda further drives the meaning to greater clarity and realization. YouTube video link:

Thank you for your review. I should point out, however, that the chorus is intended to sound louder in order for the lyrics to be at the very least audible and not drowned by the orchestra, let alone trying to make them sound barely intelligible. I find it optimal since the choir is singing the canon in th exact same configuration as the other instrumental sections: the placement of the voices across different lines and registers is the exact same for all three. And also, there is no brass in the score or audio. This is not intended as a symphonic orchestral arrangement, and I personally dislike the timbre of brass instruments and even some woodwinds such as the saxophone for example, so they are not getting included in the score anytime soon. Have a nice day.

Updated post with new score files - modifications have been made. Please, if anyone has the time, take a listen / look, and let me know what you think :) @Luis Hernández @Lithl @JorgeDavid

Over the last month, I have challenged myself to compose every day, and the following 10 pieces are the result. It's been quite a challenge and I need a bit of rest after this, but I'm proud of the amount of work I was able to put into composition this month. YouTube link Score I hope you find some joy in them!

Hello It’s a rather mixed bag. Some tracks seem to be aimed at a sort of children’s album, like ‘Pulling Together’ or ‘Little Walk’ – which isn’t to say they’re bad. Others have a more serious feel to them. Overall, it’s worth a listen, but those challenges of writing a piece a day… I don’t know, we’ve all had moments doing that or thinking about it… but in the end, and over time, I think you learn to try and make the most of the ideas that stand out. And even then, you might like them or you might not. Best regards.

I've developed a free web app https://erhythm.org/ (disclosure: I'm the developer), it's a visual, interactive rhythm composer inspired by Godfried Toussaint's "The Geometry of Musical Rhythm". The core idea is simple: rhythm is represented as geometry. You place beats on a circle, the active beats connect to form a polygon, and you can immediately hear the pattern. Euclidean rhythms, polyrhythms, and world rhythms all become visually intuitive this way. As music educators or experienced musicians, do you think a geometry-based visual approach like this has real pedagogical value for beginners who haven't yet learned to read notation? Specifically I'm wondering: Can seeing rhythm as a polygon on a circle help a pre-notation learner feel and internalize rhythm more naturally? Would you consider integrating something like this into early lessons? Are there risks or limitations to this approach compared to starting with traditional notation? As a live example, here is a Bembé Afro-Cuban rhythm you can play and interact with directly: 👉 Try it here — https://erhythm.org/composer/r/bembe-afro-cuban?utm_source=youngcomposers.com I'd appreciate honest, critical feedback from anyone with teaching or learning experience.

A revamped and corrected version of a previously published prelude and fugue transposed from F-sharp minor to E minor, originally comprised of two separately uploaded works joined together as neatly as possible. YouTube video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMss1kFsid8 Prelude and Fugue in E minor.mp3 Prelude and Fugue in E minor.pdf

As stated in the title, I've been recently experimenting with ways to add more voices to Bach's 14 canons (BWV 1087) based on the multiple contrapuntal transformations of the harmonic bassline of the Goldberg Variations' Aria. Despite being derived from the tonally transposed inversion of that main theme, the so-called "Theme 2" has been kept separate across this whole compendium since it isn't contrapuntally compatible with its inversion when also retrogradated, syncopated or played with "per arsin et thesin" imitation simultaneously. Had the latter not resulted in whole segments of parallel ocatves, an 8-voice "omnibus" canon might have been possible, but that seems to be out of the scope of these musical materials without significant alterations that would render their canonic accompaniment non-imitative and thus, non-canonic at all. There is one canon from the original that is conspicuously absent from this recollection and that is the penultimate, 13th variation: a triple canon a 6 so densely packed and finely tuned in its original conception that adding more voices without irrecognizably altering the basic structure of the others turned out to be practically impossible. Almost like Bach himself knew this one canon, in its apparent simplicity yet brilliantly complex counterpoint, was the worthiest and most perfect when he chose to be depicted holding it for his portrait. Admittedly, this video would have been better suited for this year's 276th anniversary of Bach's passing (July 27th). However, due to my tightly packed schedule this summer, I find it highly unlikely I'll be able to post anything in time to commemorate that date, hence why I'm posting this video as soon as possible in order to leave room for focusing on my final exams. Lastly, it would be short of an understatement to recognize late Gerubach's video on the 14 Canons proved invaluable to my understanding, research and tinkering with these canons, as well as the core material of much of Bach's repertoire as a whole. Some of his most laborious contributions have since been taken down after his passing more tha three years ago now in 2023, such as for example the scrolling video on the Art of the Fugue. The quality of my scrolling certainly doesn't come anywhere close to his standards, and yet, as poor and humble a homage this may be, I have chosen to honor his memory and the tireless spirit of his countless contributions by acknowledging at the very least the gargantuan influence he has had on the accessible spread of Bach's music and its myriad intricacies. YouTube video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g00QMPNDyY Google Drive folder link (full score + audio): https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1J8NblMrM6T-3muEjVO4j8TKspVfyzDuk?usp=sharing J. S. Bach's 14 Canons BWV 1087 Vocibus Pluribus Additis.mp3 J. S. Bach's 14 Canons BWV 1087 Vocibus Pluribus Additis.pdf

All right, so I'll be looking at your structure of this. Since because this is a canon by nature, it should have a really good structure intact with it. I do see some call and response sort of situation in between with the strings. However, though, I think this is due to the nature of the canon, how the melody is kind of like twisted in that sense. Just a little bit of mixing and balancing, I do believe that the chorus is a bit too loud compared to the actual orchestra itself. I don't know if the score is condensed, but I don't see any brass. So what I would just do is just blend in, fix that. Nice change of melody and great job with the ending. I appreciate uh the very satisfying ending. I do see that you do are changing keys a lot. You're getting into territory that there are double flats and also weird enharmonics, so for example, like B sharp and like C flat and so forth, and like F flats, all that crazy stuff. But anyways, though, I would treat this like a really good uh orchestral warm-up in a sense. Really good work.

Since today is this year's Mother's Day, I finally decided to finish revamping a composition I had already published for the very same occasion 3 years ago. Compared to the original, the whole piece has been transposed from E to B minor in order to better accommodate for newly included passages. However, still not dissimilar from the first drafts, passages with constant false relations are abundantly featured in this piece, to the point that the harmonic resolutions expected of more conservative counterpoint are frequently sacrificed for the sake of chromatic saturation. Scrolling video link (YouTube): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYUZX-iQSF4 Passacaille en Valse in B minor.mp3 Passacaille en Valse in B minor.pdf

After undergoing plenty of struggle to find a proper textual setting capable of matching the rhythmic patterns of this vocal fugue, I decided to settle for an altered version of the "Libera me" movement commonly found on Requiem masses. Despite the minor changes required for the text to fit the subject of the fugue, its treatment throughout has been a conscious attempt to make it as audibly intelligible as possible, as opposed to the vast majority of my previous vocal works, where any regard for the text was completely secondary to the music. This composition, as well as its harrowing message, has been dedicated in memoriam to the victims of the Wang Fuk Court fire, which tragically befell Hong Kong on November 26th. May their souls find peace and eternal rest. 請安息吧！ YouTube video link: