Leaderboard

A four-part fugue exercise composed on a given subject, with no particular instrumentation in mind. Developing the subject contrapuntally wasn’t difficult, but after a while it became rather monotonous. The labels A1, A2, B1, etc. indicate the various fragments on which the episodes are built. (The slurs are only meant to highlight motifs for my own reference.)

Hi there, @MinGry, welcome to the Forum! This is a decent piece of music, for a start, although, I do realize there a lot of compositional errors too. Bars 1-2: One of my favourite parts. It kind of has a nice, catholic tone to it. I would say, this quiet opening really fits my style. Appreciate that, though stop writing tempo numberic markings, and start using muiscal terms more. (eg. Allegro; Fast, or Largo; Slow, etc.) Bars 2-4: This is where thngs start to get messy. (not done yet, gonna come back later)

@Frederic Gill inspired this one. He wrote an invention as an exercise from one of his Counterpoint books on the same motive that you can hear here: I was inspired by his attempt so I decided to give it a try myself. Thanks for listening and I hope you enjoy and let me know what you think!

Somehow I also missed this one: The "Bestowed Maestro" badge for 10,000 reactions received!

Oh then maybe the criteria should be a thousand or higher

I'm not sure you have read all the previous comments, because you are over-lecturing me. But I'll put the blame on the bad quality of my 'pastiche'. I have admitted earlier that my episodes were short or absent. And that I have neglected the general check up. Because of that, I will delete this post once we've closed the discussion. As for the motive itself, it has a degree 4# in bar 3, which I interpret as a short modulation into the dominant. Otherwise it would just be an altered chord (IV#). So I have assumed for the last bar of the motive a Tonic: I / dom: IV-I. Please, let me know what you think of my choice. Back to your comment: At bar 6(7) we have {Sop,Bass} = {A,F}-{G,G}-{A,A} = F:I / C:IV. But what do you mean by V-IV? Or did you follow the (wrong) numbering in the score? At bar 5(6),{Bb,G}-{-.E}. This is F:vii6, followed at next bar by F:I / C:IV. The last two crochets of bar 7(8) are {D,A}-{Bb,G} = d minor: (ambiguously) i or iv. And the next bar is d:V. The key of C is at 6(7), {C,E}-{G,E}, the tonic chord of the dom key in the end of the motive, as I've just explained. I'll not explain for the other bars (12, 16). About Bach's 2-part inventions, I mentioned (in a previous comment) that Bach's faster rhythm (3 or 4 notes to a beat) is a good asset for handling unessential tones (compared to my 2-notes to a beat). But this motive has a constant, fast rhythm and has only quavers (or semi-). It doesn't leave much room for maneuver of the counter motive and trying to avoid dissonances or ambiguous chords with the motive. And I didn't want to accelerate in the counter-motive. On the contrary, I used 'augmentation' (slower rhythm applied to segments of the motive) in the counter motive. Thank you for your time.

only listen to this if you'll listen to it all the way through

Since this book is a fairly comprehensive text in harmony, you should keep what you've learnt from this book in mind - not only for these counterpoint pastiches you're writing, but for everything you write from now. The reason why I'm mentioning this is: 18th-century counterpoint (which is what the Goetschius book deals with) and all of the counterpoint-employing music that comes after, is completely interwoven with harmony. All of the harmonic devices/features you have learnt so far, you should find readily in these inventions. And so with this in mind, you can hopefully see the two major problems: There are no strong cadences (V-I in root position etc.) anywhere in the piece. This is the musical equivalent of writing a paragraph of text with no punctuation whatsoever. Some of what you write is either harmonically ambiguous, or does not follow common harmony rules. Examples: - In bar 6, what are the first two crotchets supposed to be? Is this V-IV? This is a forbidden progression. Is this I-IV? Then why is the root of I missing? Contrast this with the last two crochets of bar 7, which clearly spells out a C major chord and is well-written. - What are the last two crochets of bar 12 trying to spell out? Is this V? vii°? i? - What is bar 16? You start off with a G chord (fine), introduces the C# in the upper voice which strongly suggests a chord that is the dominant seventh in third inversion of D minor (also fine), but then this dominant seventh resolves to a B natural chord (?) Point 1 can be easily fixed. Regarding point 2: if you look at Bach's 15 Inventions, you will find that 14 of them have semiquaver prevailing rhythms, and the remainder uses broken chords extensively. This is completely deliberate in 2-part writing. Writing in semiquavers gives you more notes to work with, and one advantage of that is it allows you to trace out chords easily thereby making your harmony unambiguous. I would recommend a similar approach here. The other problem here is form. The main material in a 2-part invention is a section of invertible counterpoint, which is then repeated but often inverted (in the sense of two voices exchanging the material they play) and/or transposed, often called the theme. You have indeed written this. But you also need material between these sections, called episodes. These have multiple functions: they serve as modulatory material, they provide a break from the theme, they introduce devices not often found in the theme such as sequences, they allow motifs found in the theme to be presented in a new context (e.g. harmonised differently), they facilitate strong cadences mentioned above, and so on. You need to write these episodes in for your invention to adhere to the form.

Thanks for the comment! You’re absolutely right that thinning out the texture can help keep things fresh — that idea crossed my mind as well while writing. I treated it more like a fugue d’école rather than a stylistically Baroque fugue (the subject itself is a 20th‑century textbook theme), so I kept the four‑voice texture going longer than I normally would. I also thought about extending some of the three‑voice spots, but the subject is already pretty long and the tempo is on the slower side, so the whole thing was starting to feel a bit too stretched out. Still, your point is totally valid, and I appreciate you mentioning it. Glad you enjoyed the fugue!

For future fugues, to break up the monotony, maybe you could have more sequences with less voices? For most of Bach's 4-voice fugues, like half the fugue is for less than 4 voices. So having lots of 3 or 2 voice sequences and switching which voice combinations are doing said sequences really helps with monotony. Thank you for the enjoyable fugue 🙂

Hey, guys! I'm an amateur composer who recently attempted Celtic music for the first time. I thought it would be a fun idea to see if anyone would want to make their own version of it. 😄 I'm curious how you'd enhance the orchestration or add your flair. Feel free to experiment and share your versions! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFX2w9EWaGs

By the issue of 'passing quavers,' I meant the following. Take a look at the attached example. As you can see, the G quaver connects two consonant intervals, while it forms a seventh with the upper voice, which is a dissonant interval. Technically this is not incorrect, but musically it's very disadvantageous — since we're dealing with two‑voice counterpoint, the musical texture is very 'thin,' and this dissonant friction becomes quite audible. The same problem occurs with the other G as well. Regarding the A marked with the exclamation mark: the harmony is too 'empty' this way. If you put the subject into the bass and try to harmonize it on piano, it's obvious that an F-major (first-inversion) chord should be implied there. I think most of these issues (including the ones I mentioned earlier) can be corrected fairly easily.

Oh boy! parallel octaves! I didn't check these on fractions of a beat. BAD. {A,D} inverted to {D,A} on 3rd beat is bad indeed. 'Passing quavers': They are not essential by definition. Especially useless when they make an interval of a P4th! I guess I found it gave stamina and authority to the sequence in the motive. (NB, your picture above is not of mine). So I looked at the "frequent dissonant clashes with the passing quavers" in my exercise. I found one p4th (me24, to be corrected!), one p5th (me6, bad?), and 2 8ves (me9, 21, dissonant?). Is there more? Conclusion: I was so carried away and happy with my experience and creative process for that piece (developing the 'horizontal mirror' of the motive, what you call 'inversion' and that PC calls 'contrary motion'), that I didn't pay attention (deficit!) to all those defects and even neglected to check! That happens when I spend too much time on something, I just lose perspective. I'm definitely not a MATURE COMPOSER yet, lol. Also I knew the modulatory episodes were almost absent. I have to develop good episodes even when the tempo is fast and am afraid to lose momentum. Thanks for your feedback.

There are some problematic parallels, such as the G–A octaves in m. 6 (this corresponds to m. 7 in your score — the notation software misnumbered the measures because the initial upbeat should not be counted as a full measure), or the E–F♯ parallels in m. 9 [m. 10 in the score], and so on. Also, you can’t reuse the countermelody that you introduce just after the lower voice’s entry simply by transposing it, because it is not written in invertible counterpoint. For example, the fifth on the fourth beat of m. 4 [m. 5] becomes a fourth when the two voices are inverted. You can see the result of this in m. 7 [m. 8], where an A–D fourth appears. The interval of a fourth is always treated as a dissonance in traditional two‑part counterpoint. A passing fourth may sometimes be tolerated in the instrumental style, though. You may also want to revise some of the crotchets in the countermelody to avoid frequent dissonant clashes with the passing quavers of the theme (see the example below).

This was just an exercise from Applied Counterpoint book by Prof. Percy Goetschius. I made the inventory of octaves and there are 30! lol. Here are the details. too many 8ves 1st beat, Primary accent 5 in V or V7 = me6,9,12,15,18,24,27,30.These are good according to Goetschius. 4 in IV =me13, 16,25(?) 3rd beat, secondary accent 8 in I = me19, 25, 31 3 in I = me5, 8, 26 NOT GOOD 2nd beat, ternary accent 8 in I = me17 6 in IV = me7, 28 BAD 4th beat, ternary accent 8 in I = me11, 14 2 in I = me12, 15, 18 BAD because foreign to the chord. 2 in vii = me30 other unaccented fraction locations: me10: G is either doubled leading tone or doubled chord 7th. me22: F is doubled chord 7th According to Goetschius, these can be tolerated in fast tempo and at unaccented fractions. Is this fast enough? Any other mistakes I could learn from? Thanks.

I don't think this theme was meant to be treated as the usual antecedent/consequent imitation at the octave, like in Bach’s two-part Inventions. The subject comes from a harpsichord suite by Sheeles (not by Händel); the ascending F–G–A–B is actually a codetta leading to the real answer a fifth above. As for your solution, it keeps hitting the octave far too often — you should avoid that, as it’s too harsh for two‑part counterpoint (and there are a few voice‑leading mistakes as well). The modulations to related keys could be prepared more effectively, for example by using simple sequences built from fragments of the theme. Introducing the inversion was a good idea; it adds a bit of variety.

Challenge: Try to have a full year's time won!

Uploaded a new cover photo drawn by me!

Hi Everyone!, Acceptance is the first multi instrument character piece I have written. It is part of a broader concept: a Cycle of Death, in which I explore the theme of mortality across three pieces: Denial, Acceptance, and Rest. Using the Dies Irae as a harmonic backbone. In this piece, each instrument has a distinct role: The piano represents the truth of death that must be accepted. The flute embodies the human conversation with oneself: longing, hoping, and ultimately accepting. The violin and cello symbolize the path toward acceptance, guiding the listener through the journey. It was very fun composing this! Especially love bars:29-36 and 53-60 Let me know what you guys think! Hope you enjoy it! YouTube link Acceptance.mp3

@TristanTheTristan Thanks for the welcome! and thank you for taking the time of your day to check out my music! I really appreciate any feedback and looking forward to hear what you got say more! It's already been very interesting composing for multiple instruments my primary background is piano. I especially am blown away how much you can get away with modifying the motifs cause it feels like the instruments themselves can ground a motif pretty well.

Continuing with the Scale Materials Chapter in Persichetti's "20th Century Harmony" I wrote this Clarinet Quintet. The prompt was "8. Construct a solo clarinet line in the lydian mode supported by phrygian string quartet harmony. Set both the melody and harmony on the tonal center Bb." Thanks for listening and I hope you enjoy and let me know what you think!

This is a good motif, supported by interesting harmony! This would work well as a jazz piece. All you'd have to do is change up the harmony, and add some drums. But the rhythms and theme can remain the same!

Hello, this is my first time writing for choir. I am being commissioned by a local middle school to arrange Umbrella. I have just the bridge and a final chorus to add, but I wanted feedback. My background is percussion so I don't want to accidentally make anything to jumpy or impossible. Please be specific in critiques, I'd appreciate it! Thank you!

Comment: Rhythm: you have many unaccented dissonances (4th beat), before consonances at bars (1st beat). According to my books, the cadential effect of this breaks the flow. But as part of a repeated design, it creates a shift to the left in the rhythm. Another element that creates a shifting effect is the (10) suspensions on 2nd beat. Interesting that when you heard my v1 for the 1st time, you were caught by the Bb in me1, on 3rd beat, and questioning about the key being Db (major) or bb (minor). Because in your compo you’ve put more ‘accent’ on the 3rd and 4th beats and opted for a more minor & dissonant approach. This is highlighted in your final cadence. In contrast, my compo has a ‘dancing’ rythmic pattern (quarter notes on almost all 2nd beats). In me10, the last Cb you put (? for sake of symmetry with the ongoing sequence and the following one?) makes a 1st parallel aug4th with the next (accented) interval. I find that a plain C sounds better with the upper voice and the new key (f?).

Just came back to this piece... Appreciatable. I took an inspiration from one of the rhythms.

Well, I would start learning harmony. Soyar´s advice is excellent. By harmonizing simple, short known pieces, you will get the hang of it. At the same time, I recommend you to learn the theory, in order to understand why things work or do not work I also suggest that you should invest in a keyboard, and hook it up to a computer with a notation program (e.g.Musescore). This setup could be the easiest way for a practical study of harmony using different chords. You can store, compare and playback your work any time. Moreover, you can always see the score of your work. It is important to obtain a skill in notation and reading scores. At the same time, you can start writing (play) some VERY simple, short melodies. Then, continue with harmonizing your melody. Start with chords, and when you are satisfied, you can go for variations (for example make arpeggio´s of the chords, add a bassline etc. This is the way I started. In principle, you can do all this by yourself. There are on-line courses in composition, but mostly, I find them of limited value. Instead, I would recommend you to find a teacher.

This thread needs more activity

Yeah you did, as I don't have the time nor energy to make another year review anymore now lol!

I like it because it is different. It's 'you'. In the result, it shows your own inspiration, more than mine. But It's like being schoolmates taking the same course, lol. I'll take the time for analizing the score and get back.

update: feb 8 I have composed something that is more conform to an invention. see 'v2'

Did I miss something?

I've used an 8-bit soundfont here because I have not found any orchestral soundfonts that I liked. Everything has just too much vibrato and too heavy a texture from a HIP (historically-informed performance) point of view. I think Bach works well realised as 8-bit music so this is the approach I took. If you prefer audio which is faithful to the original instrumentation then I've attached a version of it here.

Symphony-Concerto In A Major For Electric Guitar And Orchestra-1 Free Sheet Music by Robert C. Fox for Various Instruments | Noteflight Symphony-Concerto In A Major For Electric Guitar And Orchestra-2 Free Sheet Music by Robert C. Fox for Various Instruments | Noteflight Symphony-Concerto In A Major For Electric Guitar And Orchestra-3 Free Sheet Music by Robert C. Fox for Various Instruments | Noteflight Symphony-Concerto In A Major For Electric Guitar And Orchestra-4 Free Sheet Music by Robert C. Fox for Various Instruments | Noteflight

Oh sorry 😔

Looks like @Omicronrg9 already created badges for just such a purpose! From the bottom up: Local Celebrity Trending Artist Eminent Personality Famous Worldwide Nobody has yet received the "Famous Worldwide" badge nor the "Eminent Personality" badge.

That's a neat idea. Except that this would not be a manually awardable badge but based on a rule (10,000+ reputation). The other problem is that right now the highest reputation held by anybody on the forum is @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu's at ~2,000. 10,000+ reputation seems like quite a lofty goal if nobody in the whole history of the website since the early 2000's has ever achieved it!

How about the "everyone's favourite" badge if your reputation is over 10 thousand points or higher

This sounds really nice. How long have you been composing scores (just curious)?

Hi everyone, I finished a new piano piece called Cloud Ame and wanted to share. I hope you enjoy listening and welcome any feedback! Thank you

Hello This aria could very well be in a Baroque opera. It's a shame that the sounds are so strange. It sounds like it's from the 90s with the new age style, when they did covers of classics. It sounds like electronic music.

A beautiful piece with particularly harmonious interest. It needs to be completed with dynamics and accents. With that, the fact that the accompaniment pattern does not vary would not be such a problem, as it is a little monotonous as it stands.

“Good evening, dear friends. Here is the scherzo from my third Sonata. I hope you like it.”

Wow then I would get several of them for my works! My Clarinet Quintet is 62 minutes long so it will get 2 of them!!

Thanks. Yes the colours in the pdf help working and recognizing the motives. I've put it in b&W (below) 😉. After over 1600 small exercises in melody, harmony and counterpoint (all with 6 Goetschius books) + 25 invention, I don't know what 'level' I am at. I've never had feedback until now!

Sounds good. The 13th bar is strange, but I see you've made a correction. I think there's some pretty good imitative treatment, characteristic of the Inventions. So many colours confuse me a bit. I suppose they highlight imitations or motifs, but as I'm colour blind, I can't tell. Best regards.

Hell yeah brother

How about we just ban AI and trust that people are honest, and if people find out that it's AI, they get temporarily banned. This way, people will be afraid to post AI content and not post any.

I don't think we should be Draconian about policing this. I think the policy should be no posting music composed by AI, but I really think it would be a mistake to start policing and interrogating every post and assuming it's AI until proven otherwise. If there are indications that a piece might be AI (e.g. no score provided, telltale signs of Sonus, posted by someone with no prior history on the forum, etc.), then it makes sense to inquire further into it. But demanding proof of authorship from every composition would be a drastic overreaction to an issue that has, as far as I'm aware, only actually cropped up once here so far. I'm against AI compositions on the forum, but I'd rather waste my time once or twice giving useless feedback on an AI composition than chase real people who are posting real compositions off the site.

A beautifully crafted work. I am curious to know what the motivation/intent is for this creative extensive Symphonic/Tone Poem? Mark

This is truly a STUNNING piece of work. There are many spectacular passages. You very adeptly allot enough time for each segment to Blossom. I am not trained in classical music (more pop, now easy listening), and I know classical music has a much wider dynamic range. There are a few sections on my system where I hear distortion. Even though levels are far within safe ranges, mixing something this complex is truly a challenge. I find that after I have set volumes, I go back to do some adjustments to individual instruments and groups of instruments. It certainly gives me a new respect for conductors. I might suggest going through the piece and each section, and shrinking the dynamic range by maybe 10 - 20% if that makes sense to you. I would search out the softest and loudest passages, and notice the db range. Another possible area is change lengths of different movements. Once you have clearly made your point, move on. Again, these are things I notice, and may not apply to you or other composers/listeners. I look at a long piece as a journey through a beautiful English garden. You might have a lot of one particular flower, and then a more exotic plant may be only one flower. You want to employ the yin/yang of things. consonance/disonance - bright/dark - soft/loud. Volume and tonal color changes of an instrument are the equivalent of brightening the spotlight on a certain instrument or motif you want to draw attention to. Employing these and other techniques creates a living, breathing entity that has plenty of variety. The sound palette you use can vary widely - or, in your case, create a consistency that keeps the 'wholeness' of the work stable Again, I cannot overemphasize what a beautiful thing you have accomplished. Keep up the brilliant work. Mark Styles