Leaderboard

I am stoked to finally release this great collaboration with @Maharani that we've been working on for over a month! I first found out about Marissa's Solo French Horn sonata through the United Composer's Collective discord server (UCC). I offered to play and record at first just one movement but then it turned into a full 4-movement project. I spent a lot of time practicing almost everyday getting my chops into a state of preparedness. Honestly - it was a bit like training for a marathon! LoL The movements are as follows: Sonata Aria Capriccio Ciaccona We are also including two versions of the score - the handwritten one by Marissa and a more official and mistake free engraving by me. Bandcamp link: https://maharajah.bandcamp.com/album/sonata-per-corno-op-4 Let us know what you think of the composition, engraving as well as performance of this work! We'd be stoked to hear any of your comments, critiques, suggestions or observations! Thanks for listening. Sonata per corno – 1. Sonata.mp3Sonata per corno – 2. Aria.mp3Sonata per corno – 3. Capriccio.mp3Sonata per corno – 4. Ciaccona.mp3 Sonata per corno – handwritten score.pdf Sonata per corno Complete.pdf

Hi @draingxngceo! First of all, a hearty welcome here to the forum. I’m very excited about your post, because your passion for fugues and the attempt to compose your own ones after studying the Well-Tempered Clavier remind me of my own first steps in composition many years ago. You have tagged the post with „beginner“ and mentioned that you „don’t really have composition knowledge or experience“. However, the short „sketch“ of an exposition of a fugue is not „nothing“, so I think you indeed have acquired a basic knowledge about fugues through studying the ones from the WTC (or you are just extraordinary talented from nature :-)). That said, some of my more general explanations about fugues below might be obvious to you, but that basic knowledge on fugue writing/analysis might be interesting or useful for other readers, too. Getting started. Before I’ve listened your fugue exposition for the first time, I took a look at the score to get an initial impression. At the first glance, it is not entirely obvious what key the piece is in and how long the fugue subject is. Your fugue subject does not prominently start at the pitch of B or G# and the last note of the fugue subject can only be identified by comparing all three subject entries: It is a B, the first sixteenth note in measure two. Therefore, I am now certain that the fugue is in the key of B major (which is perhaps hinted at by the title “B Majuh,” but—I’m curious—what language is that?). No that is not an error - it makes it somewhat harder to analyze the fugue. With that first impression and the comment of @Luis Hernández I have now taken a closer look at your fugue in order to conduct a more detailed analysis and perhaps offer some suggestions or solutions for the few issues I noticed or that have already been mentioned by other reviewers. Below you will find my annotated score as well as an audio version. The fugue subject. A fugue starts with the introduction of its central melodic material, called the fugue subject. As the fugue subject is introduced by one voice solo, anyone can easily recognize a fugue. A melody to be used as a fugue subject must meet certain requirements in order to be suitable for this purpose: It should have a distinctive melodic and rhythmic character so that it is memorable. The melody may contain smaller fragments (motifs) that can be developed later in the fugue independently. The subject must clearly define the home key (tonic). However, a good fugue subject avoids a final, closed cadence and appears “open” to forward motion. Typically, subjects are relatively short (from one to four bars), although they can be longer, and stay within a moderate range (often an octave or less). The melody should maintain a steady flow - with a mix of rhythmic activity - that creates and preserves momentum. You’ve created an interesting fugue subject that meets almost all of these requirements. I especially like its memorable rhythmic character. Starting with rests (I see, you have studied Bach’s fugues from the WTC where he often starts its fugue subjects with rests), helps that the subsequent subject entries encounter seamlessly in the continuing flow of the fugue and prevents that the fugues rhythm becomes too „static“ or „blocky“. The only „weakness“ concerning the above definitions is that it „meanders“ around the home key B before the tonic is established by the final note. There is nothing wrong with that fact – it might bring some more harmonic freedom or possibilities within the further development. In my annotated score I have emphasized the fugue subject in blue color and marked its start with the letter T (i.e. „Thema“ for subject in German). As you can see, I have separated the last sixteenth note of the subject from the following ones and included a caesura in the phrasing to emphasize the end of the subject and to separate it somewhat from the following sixteenth-notes runs, which represent the (beginning) of the counterpoint. Dux and Comes. Once the subject has been played by the first voice, it is then imitated - one after the other - by the other voices. The answer is not a repetition of the subject on the same pitch, but transposed one, up a fifth (or down a fourth) to the dominant. Such an answer is called “Comes” (i.e., companion), while the original subject entry is called “Dux” (i.e., leader). The third voice enters again in the tonic as Dux, the fourth voice - if present - in the dominant as Comes, and so on (although there may be deviations from the order Dux - Comes - Dux - Comes). Your fugue exposition consists of three voices which create an „ordinary“ arrangement of Dux and Comes: First subject entry as Dux in the Soprano in the tonic key of B major, second subject entry as Comes in the Alto in the dominant ky of F# major and finally third subject entry as Dux in the Tenor (or Bass) in the tonic key of B major. Real and Tonal Answer. Whenever the subject entry by the Comes is a literal, note-by-note transposition of the original subject as played by the Dux up a perfect fifth, we speak of a „real answer”. However, it might be necessary for some kinds of subjects to perform a slightly modified transposition - called „tonal answer” - especially with regard to the dominant note (i.e. the 5th scale degree), if it appears prominently at the beginning of the subject. In the second subject entry you have altered the first pitch from an A# (as it would be when applying a literal transposition) to a B, in order to stay in the tonic key of B major for the first while. That is a kind of a „tonal answer“, but interestingly not applied at the fifth or the fourth, but on the third. There is nothing wrong with it; rather, it proofs that the fugue subject is somewhat „advanced“ or „challenging“ in its harmonic line. Counterpoint and Countersubject. The counterpoint is a distinct melodic line that accompanies the fugue subject (or its answer) in a different voice. It provides musical contrast and rhythmic independence against the main subject. Whenever it appears more than once, it is also called „countersubject” - as it is a recurring companion of the subject, perhaps throughout the entire fugue, but at least during the exposition. It must be constructed to sound harmonically correct when inverted (e.g., if it is used below and above the subject), calling it an „invertable counterpoint”. If the melodic line accompanying the subject does not return regularly, it is considered rather than a formal countersubject. Your counterpoint is a „free counterpoint“, not a recurring one that could be considered to be a „countersubject“. Because of its sixteenth note figures, it moves forward, introducing momentum. Furthermore, especially in bar 5, you have distributed that movement between the Soprano and Alto which is a good example for counterpoint in its rhythmically sense. All in all that rhythmic texture creates a (nearly) perfect „complementary rhythm“, that is when the different voices complement to each other so that there exists a played note on every sixteenth beat, from whatever voice it comes. In the transition from mm. 3 to mm. 4 I have introduced some slightly modifications (highlighted in yellow) in order to emphasize that complementary rhythm, ensuring that all sixteenth notes beats „are played“ mitigating the somewhat „thin sounding“ octave on F# on the first note of mm. 4 (even if it is not a parallel octave, that particular note sounds „thin“ for my ears, causing me to “stumble” a bit while listening). By the way, the tritone in bar 6 – which was mentioned by @LuisHernandez – does not sound so bad to my ears, so my mitigation for that passage is also more a rhythmic modification in the sense of complementary rhythm (with the benefit that the dissonance is shifted more to a passing note): Exposition and Development. The complete, subsequent entries of the fugue subject in all voices is called a development of the subject. The first of that development sections - e.g. the initial introduction of the fugue subject through all voices - is called the exposition, since the subject is presented here for the first time, usually obeying the rules of „Dux and Comes” as explained above, thus presenting the subject in the tonic and the answer in the dominant key. In the subsequent development sections, those „rules” are often interpreted more „relaxed”, meaning that the subject now appears - after a modulation by an interlude (or „episod”) - in other keys (such as related keys as the dominant or subdominant or the parallel key, or even in more distant or unrelated keys). Furthermore, now „fugal arts”, such as inversion, augmentation and diminution and stretto are applied increasingly to depict the subject in an altered nature, or to create tension. In the closing section of a fugue, the subject finally returns to the tonic key, sometimes over a tonic or dominant pedalpoint. There might be a passage after the ultimate subject entry, which is called a coda and whichs purpose is to bring the fugue to the end with the respective cadence. Your short example (measures 1 to 6) is – in my opinion – a good exercise for a fugue exposition. Episodes . An episode is a transitional section that separates the development sections of a fugue, acting as an interlude to modulate between keys and to create contrast. Episodes often feature sequential repetition of a melodic pattern, which contributes to the modulation and creates a sense of forward momentum. As a general “rule”, the complete fugue subject does not appear within an episode. However, episodes typically - though not always - use motifs derived from the subject or countersubject. Measures 7 and 8 could be the beginning of an episode (while I consider mm. 8 „unfinished“ in the soprano part). When listening that final two bars, I could imagine, that the fugue subject re-enters in the second half of bar 8, thus closing the gap in the soprano part with its first upbeat-motif ... Conclusion. I very enjoyed your attempt at composing a fugue and I’m excited to hear more about the success of that fugue(s). Perhaps, my comments and my slightly modified version can be useful in that process. (And as you can see – and hopefully hear -, I have introduced some extend of dynamics, articulation and tempo changes in the score and audio, expressing somewhat how I would interprete the piece as a piano player.) As for the suggestions to start by studying books and trying out “simpler exercises” (such as inventions, etc.) - yes, that’s undoubtedly true. However, if you enjoy trying out writing fugues, I would strongly recommend to continue that - and, of course, study Bach’s fugues from the Well-Tempered Clavier - only the best source is good enough for learning! B-Majuh-piano-steinway-b.mp3 B-Majuh-colored.pdf

These days are great in that I can see such nice collaborations like Henry & Vasilis, plus the Peter & Maharani pair! 😊 Peter, these pieces were good to hear. This kind of solo melody music is somehow difficult and you made nice pieces. I love your reverb version and, of course, Maharani's one. I think I like "Sonata" - this is a good opening for starting listening to these. Thank you for sharing. By the way, I've never listened to horn solo pieces. I know solo trumpet, saxophone - jazz sometimes does that but are there any solo horn pieces like that? I don't know. As for solo music, I love Paganini Violin Sonatas, not horn, though. That's awesome, isn't it? Anyway, nice job, both of you! I enjoyed it :) Hello Alexx, you can see Peter's horn in this topic, haha. For your reference! Best, Lithl.

Nocturne- E minor.mp3Nocturne- E minor.pdf Hello. Recently finished this piece and felt it was something interesting to share; What i feel makes this piece distinct is that its quite heavily harmonically driven, as in the melody doesn't stray far from the current harmonic background; I'm quite satisfied with the structure, as i feel it keeps the piece interesting and fresh all the way through; I'm still not sure if i should say this piece is in E minor, as its never really suggested until the very end. (also this piece used to have a subtitle in early stages, but as i was composing further on it didn't quite stick, so some ideas of what to call it would be nice) Thoughts and feedback are always welcome. Enjoy the music.

Good evening=) I’ve watched and listened to your Quartet. It seems to me that this is a very raw piece that needs serious revision. There are a great many purely technical issues. Even in computer playback, your texture doesn’t sound good, and with live players it will sound even worse. Your voices often cross and double each other. For example, in the “Pastorale”, right at the beginning, the cello and viola play the same notes, but the cello sustains quarter notes while the viola plays eighths. As a result, both will sound poor, and the accompaniment will get muddy. What’s more, your voices aren’t independent. You double many of the moves (literally in the second measure the cello, the viola, and the first violin, which has the melody, all play the same descending B–A together, and in the fourth you for some reason double the melody in the bass). This sounds extremely inexperienced. Avoid this. If you do double something (for example, if you need it for some effect), double everything, and do it consciously. If you don’t double, then don’t do it anywhere. Avoid moving all the voices in the same direction, especially in four or more parts. You’re working in a style close to the classical one, and such moments really grate on the ear here. In fact, they sound bad almost everywhere, and here especially so. Why you changed the type of texture in the 5th measure is completely unclear. There is neither the end of a section nor some especially important part of the theme there. It isn’t needed there either structurally or in terms of meaning. It’s as if you tugged the listener by the sleeve, they got ready to hear something important, and you didn’t say anything. The listener was disappointed :) You are trying to fill the entire vertical space from the bass to the very top, and there is no good reason for it. There is a good rule: the lower the register, the wider the intervals. Narrow intervals in the small octave and below sound unclear. They can be used there only with a clear and evident purpose. In your piece they often just sit there for the sake of being there. That will sound bad too. More notes doesn’t mean a richer sound. Four voices are quite enough in a quartet. They will then sound very clean, expressive, and beautiful. And if you want a rich sound, it is achieved by making the texture more polyphonic, not by mechanically adding notes. I hope you’re not offended by my remarks. All of this can be easily fixed, and it will come with practice :) I wish you luck and inspiration. Alex

Hello A fantastic piece, rich in colour and beautifully orchestrated. I find this sort of work for wind bands to be a rather distinctive genre, and by no means an easy one. In the area where I live (Spain, on the Mediterranean coast) there’s a very strong tradition of street bands (marching bands?). They play whilst marching the whole time and consist of dozens of clarinets, oboes, flutes, sometimes saxophones, and percussion—including timpani, which are constantly pushed along by two assistants. There are many bands here and they play at the local festivals. For example, in many villages and neighbourhoods, ‘Moors and Christians’ festivals are held (lasting 3–5 days), as this country was under Muslim rule for seven centuries (from 711 to 1492) and these festivals re-enact the final Christian victory. Anyway, it’s fascinating. And that’s why we have such a wonderful Muslim heritage in this country in every aspect (traditions, cuisine, the language). These bands parade with various groups throughout the day and play pasodobles, music that sounds ‘Arabic’, and so on… That’s why I’m so fond of this sort of band. Anyway, sorry for rambling, but I’d like to congratulate you on this music.

Piano sketches can be useful for beginners in composition because it keeps them focused on making sure the raw musical material is worth actually expanding into something big like an orchestra. However, once you are skilled enough in simply "composing", and your familiarity with the orchestra grows, you tend to outgrow the sketch and see its very limited utility. I actually sort of dislike the piano as an instrument, because it is really not very expressive and sterile, whereas the orchestra can play from whisper quiet to deafeningly loud and with a huge number of articulations that a piano simply cannot emulate. What can happen if you rely all the time on a piano sketch is that you will orchestrate the music in a very basic manner; no trills, horn rips, portamento, mordents or other ornamentation...because the piano is not really capable of it. Another issue is that in orchestration, tone colour is of paramount importance and basically why you would use an orchestra in the first place. A melody played on the oboe can have an entirely different character than it would played by the horns; the piano captures neither. Where this also manifests itself is in harmony. For example, in a piece I am presently working on, it begins with the horns playing a Gm add9, no5 chord at piano dynamics. This has a real warm, ethereal quality that the piano and sustain pedal couldn't capture. Thus, if I had reached for the piano instead of a horns patch in my DAW, I don't think I would've come up with the harmonic language the piece has. Another thing is that: I compose for film. Two films I did this year I had just a few weeks to compose the score before the premieres in a major city. So there were hundreds of people counting on me to be on time. I just don't have time to sketch things out in a piano and then try to translate it to an orchestra. Especially not in film, where the picture itself influences the structure and orchestration; makes way more sense to just go straight for the instruments you have in mind. You can also get some sample libraries these days which are quite playable or at least set up a couple of patches to play in tandem (like staccato + long) and "sketch" that way, with the instrument sounds right at your finger tips. In notation software, you could play your melody on your keyboard, and then just enter it straight away to the violins. Don't like how it is on the violins after all? Copy/Paste it to the flutes in a second. Piano sketches have their uses. Concert composers might still find use for it and beginners will value it, but modern technology has given us better alternatives, I find. It should also be noted that composers of old often didn't really use a "piano" sketch even if they worked at a piano. Following what @Sojar Voglar said, John Williams' sketches were always 3-stave reductions for winds, strings and brass. So even when he was writing at the piano, he was pretty much orchestrating it at the same time. He was always composing with the orchestra in mind.

Hello everyone! I'd be most grateful for any feeback on this piece. Thank you in advance! View-from-the-air.mp3 74PDF.pdf

Thank you! It was a pleasure working with you! I hope to take full advantage of the embouchure conditioning that my chops have been through to get to be able to play your sonata! Here are the files with reverb as a bonus! (and also my preferred version for my own listening pleasure) Sonata per corno 1. Sonata reverb.mp3 Sonata per corno 2. Aria reverb.mp3 Sonata per corno 3. Capriccio reverb.mp3 Sonata per corno 4. Ciaccona reverb.mp3

wonderful feedback! I appreciate the fact you've listened to it multiple times. Thank you for the corrections, I'm going to fix the stems on 51 (and the same thing in the altos in the beginning). I have accepted the parallel octaves, wait until you find all the 5ths in the innervoices. I do agree that the tenor 2s are a little low at times, but I'm not sure if I could do much to fix that at this point. I wrote this with a specific 40 person choir in mind https://open.spotify.com/track/63UKqUzlYZmKgsIu8UEw0F?si=7c7f696d83dd4501. I understand the range of sopranos is a little crazy, but I don't intend all the sopranos to sing every note. Especially on their low notes, I kept the sopranos in on measure 14, I felt as though the sopranos should know that the [e] on pickup to 15 is not an entrance, but the continuation of the phrase. I don't even care if the sopranos sing the low notes, but I do care that they not "come in". I'm not sure how else I could make this clarification without it becoming an unnecessary burden to the eyes. For the low bass low notes, that is my voice part so I felt comfortable with what I wrote. I do sort of wonder if m. 6 will work out how it sounds right now, since it is not a very harmonically anchored chord. I can see how the 3 way split could be overkill, I think that last chord could be a little more balanced, especially with the tenors and sopranos being tutti while the basses and altos are divsi.

Hello and nice to meet you, Mr. DarwinNE! I'm glad you are here. I wanted to comment on this piece of yours, but I have had something to do so far. My first impression is that the melody starting around 1:25 is so beautiful. Catchy, heartfelt music and I felt what you want to express, your musical vibe. Some mixing points caught my attention - about clarity: I think you've already gotten familiar with it, you know, like Parallax Audio's Virtual Sound Stage — you might be able to adjust it in more detail. However, overall, it sounds great so, no problem. I'm looking forward to you dropping what you wrote recently. Also, looking at your profile and notes, you make electronic stuff, right? Please post it too - in this forum, electronic stuff is usually quiet, haha. Thank you for coming here - let's enjoy YC together :) Best, Lithl.

I listened a few times to this piece and I like it. I for instance really appreciate the planing harmonies constructed by the voices. I love the structure of the piece with the charming central section. If you are planning to have it sung by a real choir, I have a few doubts about the choice of vocal ranges. You are asking your sopranos to reach a low A in bar 14 and to reach a high B in bars 45-46, that is an extension over two octaves. While there are certainly sopranos comfortable with a high B natural, they may not be very happy (or expressive) while singing in the very low register two octaves lower, even if doubled by the altos. The tenors, even when divided, often sing in a medium register, more fit to baritones (especially T2). Especially in the more expressive parts of the piece, you may ask T1 to sing higher for a longer moment and reach a high G# that remains comfortable and sure and keep the T2 in the register that you are currently using for T1. Beware of the deep registers for the basses that may sound cavernous and give results that are not what I think you would expect. If you are not lucky, a low E may not sound tender and elegantly controlled, as required by the piece. Concerning the writing style, for instance in bar 51 the following bars, how is the divisi expected to work with T1/T2? If the quarter notes have to be sung by both tenors, I would put a second stem oriented downwards. I spotted a few parallel octaves between the parts, such as in bar 13 between the S/A (that are singing together given the very low register of the S) and the B1. If it is intentional I am not shocked by it 😊 I wonder if the triple divisi in the basses is really required for the last note.

I will look at it

With the third movement, and I think the fourth movement there is some issues with the viola’s going out of range. Their lowest note is a C you have stuff going down to a B you could probably get that with the cellos.

@Wieland Handke Thank you for the very in depth response! I actually did not know about this complimentary rhythm thing but I think it was something I was doing instinctively. For some reason I was actually avoiding it somewhat. I think I was trying to give the music room to breathe or something. And I think I might have focused too much on each line being independent and having a very coherent melody when played just by itself. At first your modifications sounded awkward to me of course I am used to my own version but after a few listens they do make a lot of sense.

I really like how the piece patiently unfolds it's texture and content without trying force it's melody out so strikingly against the accompaniment, rather they compliment one another to create that moodiness, the erraticness sounds natural rather than abrupt... The continous motions of the accompaniment make the pauses in the ending measure and the ending feel well-earned rather than just reached.

Thank you so much for the warm words! I came across the original melody by chance on You Tube, and immediately fell in love with it. So I decided I had to use it for this project.

What an interesting composition. Writing a solo piece for a single-line instrument is a kind of marker of compositional mastery. There’s nowhere to hide here: not behind harmony, not behind any effects in the texture or counterpoint. Pure melody and form. It turned out to be a captivating piece. And the performance, of course. It’s a pleasure to hear music played on a live instrument by a live performer. It was played very convincingly and delicately. Simply bravo. By the way, I didn’t know that Peter is a horn player. For some reason I thought you were a theorist. Your username pushed me to that conclusion. =)

@PeterthePapercomPoser @Maharani Wow congrats on the collaboration! I like both versions, but the reverb version really adds a layer of lushness to the sound, it's great. :) Seems like a lot of effort went into the recording and practicing, so well done there Peter. The handwritten score is clear and I'm envious of your nice handwriting lol. The language is interesting, what was the thought process behind it? ❤️ Well done you two, it's always great to hear live recordings here, and this was a fine example of what collaboration can achieve

Hi @Aw Ke Shen ! I actually did this before when I was young, as I always press the middle pedal of an upright to practice so everything is muted. I did this to strengthen my fingerings though. Your learning approach as you describe would be mainly aural and theoretical, but there are also some people who learn by auditory or manual method, so it really depends. My recent learning approach would be to play the piece as close as the original tempo with all details. By forcing myself to so many things happening I actually learn faster than just grabbing details first, probably because I’m an N person (intuitive) in MBTI instead of an S person (sensory), so I need to grab the big picture before going into details first. Henry

Hello. I listened to your Nocturne. The piece is very interesting in its musical language, and it is well constructed in terms of form. However, it seems to me that this music belongs to the category of works that look clearer and more understandable on paper than they sound. Both in the accompaniment and in the melodic line you use very wide leaps and cover a very large range. For this reason, without the score it’s not always possible to tell where the accompaniment is and where the main figure is. The pulsation in groups of nine also feels somewhat intrusive. But that is probably more a problem of computer playback. A live pianist would most likely play more softly, and that pulsation wouldn’t draw so much attention. In any case, it’s good, interesting music.

My composition. I would appreciate any feedback.

OK, I saw some profession stuff that you added in the stuff at the end is fine. You cannot do you wanna also maximize maybe your bass a bit. timpani in concert bass drum would work well especially leaving a roomy feel for some stuff, especially some climaxes when I mean by climmax , I’m talking about like some of the stuff that just stands louder than the rest you could add some other things like a concert bass drum or timp or a sizzle cymbal

Thanks Mark, much appreciated. And you're right, I guess that was the general direction I was headed in.

Peter asked me to write a little review, and I'm very happy to. :) For starters, I was ecstatic that Peter agreed to play even one of my movements for solo horn! At the time I was only able to offer a low payment, yet he thought the piece was interesting enough to learn, anyway. Then, after 18 years of not hearing any complete piece of mine performed, I got hungry for more, and when I got an extra paycheck, I gradually asked if Peter was interested in learning more movements I'd written for solo horn. He kept saying yes, and after he agreed to the fourth one, I decided to assemble them into a coherent four-movement sonata. Throughout the process, Peter was patient with my many requests for changes to his engraved score and for re-recording parts of movements that I thought weren't quite perfect yet. He spent many weeks practising for hours almost every day until we both were happy with the completed result, and I couldn't be more pleased with the finished recording. I added a tip to our agreed payment for his dedication to our project. I can highly recommend him to anyone interested in asking him for engraved scores or horn recordings. At some point I hope to be able to hire him for recording another horn solo sonata! :)

A lovely piano miniature in the style of Erik Satie. Mark

Yes, of course, you're right about inspiration. And certainly, a small change can suddenly open up an unsuspected dimension of new possibilities and you need to keep working till you get there, and after you get there... There's this seductive myth about the way Pushkin worked, but we won't get into that ;) About the appoggiaturas, I get it now. I didn't know it was old-fashioned to use grace notes. In fact I started using them very recently instead of triplets. Shows I'm perhaps living somewhat in a bubble and need to exchange more with others who compose - hence my starting to use various forums for the first time a few days ago. :) Thanks again for your comments.

This is so lovely! Congratulations on the performance and the composition. The slow, out of body piano part suits the text well and the spread range of the soprano part should be very satisfying for the singer.

I think simply waiting for inspiration isn’t the best idea. As Tchaikovsky said, inspiration is a guest who doesn’t like to visit the lazy. Of course, there are times when a flash of insight comes. But often you have to grab yourself by the scruff of the neck and drag yourself to work :) I also sometimes go through many different versions of the same theme or the same piece. At times I’m amazed at how much changes from altering just one note or one duration. A theme that once seemed unsuccessful can be transformed so much that you almost consider yourself a genius and simply enjoy the result. So I think one should keep working and working. As for the appoggiaturas, no, the issue isn’t that the notes are too long or too short. It’s just that the notation itself, purely graphically, looks somewhat old-fashioned on the page. That’s how it was usually written in Mozart’s time. Nowadays it’s more common to write regular notes. For example, you could write a reverse dotted rhythm there, or a triplet, depending on exactly how you want it to be played. An appoggiatura gives the performer some freedom, whereas if you write out the notes, they have to play it exactly. But of course, it’s up to the composer. Your notation is by no means bad or wrong. Just unfamiliar. =)

A lovely lush work with interesting harmonies .... reminds me of pieces by Samuel Barber. Mark

Hi Julien, sorry for the late response! I want to thank you for the revision of my work, very appreciated and i will work on this little collection on the future. The idea of the seven pieces is from the idea of the woman's body. I've been inspired from the most common carateristic of it. I have a problem with repetition I know ahhaaha. I'll reply about your doubts: 1) the eight notes are meant to be played with the preferred hand, if you are skilled enough to trill while playing the voice you can do that. 3) not my favourite either. The idea was about a lulluby, so one simple melody with little changes in the armony, but not good as I thought it would become 4) I was in doubt about the repetiition section, now you convinced me to delete or change it entirely 5) I think there's some paralel, but not in my interest 6) the dissonance is very attuned on a real piano, in the MIDI is quite harsh to listen 7) this one piece (the little motif in particular) born from an impro which is recorded on my YT. The fragment remained in my head so long that I wanted to re-use it on this little piece. The single one bar which is blank is made for a cadenza ad lib. or a impro on the theme. I think I have to clarify it. The idea is to remember (like i remembered the fragment, which comes frome the past). I leave the interpretation with the other pieces of the collection to the listener :) Thanks again!

Hello. I’ve watched and listened to your work. It’s a very worthy composition. I like the thematic material, the harmonic language, and the form. It’s a complete and well-proportioned prelude. The only thing I don’t quite understand is why you use this notation with long appoggiaturas. It looks rather old-fashioned, as if it were still the 18th century :) I also have a question about the voice leading: why do you remove notes from the accompaniment when they are doubled by the melody? But these are all minor details. Best of luck, and may inspiration be with you! =)

Beautiful horn sonata, and this sounded exhausting to play lol. Also, the recording with the reverb is excellent. This would be really fun to layer with an orchestral backing.

1 Andantino / Trio 2 Andante 3 Vivace Scherzo 4 Vivace string quartet .mp3 String quartet nr 1 pastrol.mp3 String quartet pastrol Scherzo.mp3 String quartet No 1 Mov 4 pastarol.mp3 string quartet .pdf String quartet nr 1 pastrol.pdf String quartet pastrol Scherzo.pdf String quartet No 1 Mov 4 pastarol.pdf

Whenever composers and theory teachers talk about crafting a balanced melody, they always go to period form. Yes, it is talked about excessively, and many composers, especially in the Romantic era ignore it for more asymmetrical or looser structures, but it is one of the best ways to start when one is learning initially, and it was used by the masters, e.g. Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven. The structure of a period can be pared down to this: question and answer, or the antedecent and the consequent. The antecedent, ideally four bars. introduces the main melodic motif in bars 1-2, and introduces a contrasting idea in the next two, leading to an inconclusive cadence, usually half or imperfect authentic. The consequent, the same length as the antecedent restates the opening idea, either identically or with a slight variation to suit the preceding or succeding ideas and harmonies. The contrasting idea follows the same contour as its mirror in the antedecent, however it leads to a strong, usually perfect authentic cadence. Depending on how it is constructed, the period has two main types. The parallel and the contrasting. In the parallel, the consequent begins in the same vein as the antedecent. Think of the opening of Mozart's K. 331 sonata. In a contrasting period, the consequent begins with new melodic material, but retains the harmonic hierarchy of an inconclusive cadence followed by a conclusive one. If you want to read more like this, check out my website! And if you have requests or feedback, feel free to put them in the Google form on the site! Website: https://sites.google.com/view/beneath-the-score

Yep, Caplin’s book is definitely the gold standard for phrase syntax, but it’s also a massive academic text. My goal with the article/website was to provide quick reference guides(and other stuff) that are a bit more digestible!

Hey, I'm not offended I'm not very good at multiple instruments.

Thank you very much for the positive feedback. Yes, you’re right, the computer plays it too evenly and unexcitingly. On the other hand, I wouldn’t want too many agogic deviations here. It seems to me that much more attention should go to dynamic shading rather than agogics. As for the Tropak, that’s an interesting association! I hadn’t noticed the influence of that dance, but perhaps it’s easier to see from the outside. And it’s interesting that the music sounds Russian to you. Yes, I’m Russian, but this piece seemed fairly neutral to me. Just as, by the way, Shostakovich’s Fifth Symphony seems relatively neutral to us here, while in Europe, they say, it’s perceived as very Russian.

Hello Everyone! Today, I am sharing an old work of mine that I have been reorchestrating and revising: The Golden Lakes. PROGRAM NOTE: The Golden Lakes is a short and evocative work for concert band telling a story of night and day upon a lake. Inspired by the geography surrounding the home of the composer, The Golden Lakes evokes the glimmer and sparkle of light from the sun as it crests over the horizon into darkness. During the night, the lake is left vulnerable to the winds, darkness and more, ever waiting for the sun to come back and bring warmth. Originally composed in 2024, this work was commissioned by Kistler’s former band directors. In 2026, this work went under revisions by the composer in the early fall following a period of chamber works he created. This version presented to you is the piece he revised in 2026. Join the concert band as they take us into the landscape and paint us the scenes from The Golden Lakes. This work is set to be a Grade 3-4 for wind band. If you wish to know more about the work, check out the "About" section on page 4! Lastly, if you enjoyed this work, leave a reaction and a comment detailing your thoughts! AUDIO_Golden Lakes.mp3 SCORE_GoldenLakes.pdf

@AngelCityOutlaw Thank you very much for your contributions. Of course, I understand all the different viewpoints and situations. The thing is, even though I’m still at an intermediate level (I think) when it comes to orchestral composition, I almost always write directly for the orchestra. First comes the idea – which might be a melody, but is often something else – and I already picture which instruments will be used, and so on. But my current mentor on these matters remarked that in orchestration, if you have good voice leading, you’ve got a large part of it sorted. And in this regard, he recommends using a sketch – not a standard piano stave, nor a piano reduction. Rather, use two, three or four staves (depending on the size of the orchestra you’re using) to outline the ideas and structures. Of course, I think he’s right. But I find this method useful when you’re developing an orchestral work of a certain scale, length, structure, and so on… For something lasting just 3 minutes, I don’t see it as necessary. I also think, as you mention, that it’s not the same whether you have all the time in the world to compose and orchestrate, or whether you have to work whilst adapting to deadlines and other people. And of course, reading the biographies of the greats – Verdi and Wagner, for example – it’s clear they did make sketches on the piano… But they didn’t have the digital tools we have today, and it was their only way not only of structuring tremendously complex works, but also of creating their ‘demos’ to present and rehearse their works. Best regards.

Hi @Alexx ! I love the Prokofiev-like angularity of your melodies! The chromaticism is also a welcome feature and very entertaining! Very Russian of you! (You're Russian, right? Forgive me if I'm wrong.) As a critique, I think this sounds slightly artificial without any changes in tempo and at the tempo you have. I think a real pianist would usually play this slightly slower and it would be great if you tried to play and record this yourself. I think at a constant tempo it starts to sound somewhat resembling a Russian Tropak or the famous Russian music from the game "Tetris" (or a march). I think it would greatly enrich your music if you found ways to include tempo fluctuations. For me, I've occasionally written pieces where each measure there's a constant alteration between ritardandi and accelerandi. If you don't want to clutter up your score with those kind of indications you could just write "rubato" at the beginning with the tempo indication and hide the ritard's and accel's. That's of course for a very different kind of piece and doesn't really apply to this particular style you have here. Nonetheless, I think I'll leave my comments for any future piano pieces you may write. Thanks for sharing!

As another bonus, this inhumanly fast rendering is what the capriccio sounds like in my head ~ Sonata per corno – 3. Capriccio (fast).mp3

Feel free to have a go at it if you feel like it. :)

And here is the second adagio from the same album, 'Triptych"

Thanks Mark? Interesting harmonies is exactly what I was aiming for!

Hi Alex, Thank you very much for your words about my piece. I'm glad it comes across well. I often labour for months over pieces and this was completed over a few days. I work every day on compositions and often wonder if it would not be better to do nothing until a rare moment comes when you're able to achieve complete concentration effortlessly. On the other hand, sometimes you chip away for hours and days and all of a sudden something gives and you're in the zone. So I guess it can work both ways, but I often think that the second approach is wasting time that could be spent differently. How is it with you? About the voice leading: removing some notes was just an afterthought, to be more "light", but it wasn't even played that way to be honest and I realised that it doesn't improve anything. About the appoggiaturas are you saying they are sometimes too long to be expressed as grace notes ? Thanks again for your comments, very much appreciate it!

I am absolutely ecstatic with Peter's recording!! Peter, thank you so much again for your hard work and dedication. I could not be happier with the result, and I feel I've made a new friend as well. ❤️ Feel free to upload your versions with reverb as a bonus! :)

I made an updated version below, with quite a few tweaks to the composition, and the midi production. Just wondering, since you're a percussion specialist, which instruments would you use to bring more texture? Not sure the seed shaker was a success. It sounded better in my head! Likewise the tambourine. (N.B. Dynamics are optimised for midi, not real musicians.) Full orchestra improv #15 (with ZL compressor).mp3 Full orchestra improv #15 (with ZL compressor).pdf

The allegro below was an earlier movement for a wind quartet (back in 2019) that now contains lots of revisions. At the time, I thought it was 'perfect' but almost 10 years later, evidently it was not! 😬 Second movement recycled from another standalone piece I had made for wind quintet originally. The Rondo is a work in progress. Currently working on the C section (minor). I quite like the theme... think it is catchy. String Quartet in C (Allegro).mp3 String Quartet in C (Second Movement).mp3 String Quartet in C (Rondo Idea).mp3 String Quartet in C (Allegro).pdf String Quartet in C (Second Movement).pdf String Quartet in C (Rondo Idea).pdf

During my studies I sometimes did the sketches but with the experience comes the inner ear skill. Today I can hear the orchestra before I even write notes down. I guess I would be able to be deaf like Beethoven and compose further, trusting my inner ear.