Leaderboard

Hey there Weiland! Thanks for checking this out, it always means a lot to hear great feedback. ❤️ Thank you, friend. I'm acutely aware of the style of each of these preludes, as I'm constantly thinking about the overall feel with each one, wanting them to possess their own unique character. One of my weaknesses as a composer has been counterpoint, or at least using it in the foreground versus just thinking about it with melody and harmony. I've posted the previous preludes on the forum (check the topics tab in my profile, I'm lucky enough to have @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu give his interpretations), and a style they lack was one that focused on a more contrapuntal foundation. Personal challenge accepted. 😄 I'll also say that it makes me bashful to hear you enjoyed the counterpoint, as your talent with it is drenched in the music I've heard of yours. I wrote the first twelve a few years ago, with the intention of having each one focused on a different tonal center. The scales and approaches used varied a ton, at least that was the intention. There's blues, Chopinesque ones, soliloquys, video game character adaptations, etc. These next twelve started differently. I'm varying the tone centers, but maybe I repeat some here and there. Not sure yet, but the restriction this time is I'm limited to the 61 keys on the keyboard I'm using to brainstorm and workout things. Thanks for listening and sharing your thoughts, it means a lot!

Hi everyone! This is my sonata for piano and alto saxophone, which I composed over this summer as a birthday gift for my mom (born on Halloween!) Below you'll find my own formal analysis of the work to help parse a piece that even I find a little bit dense. The analysis will focus on the most complex movement, the third, so if a more thorough explanation of the first two movements is wanted I'll edit this post to include theme here. Please bear in mind that there are passages in this piece which are meant to be played completely freely from a rhythmic standpoint, and MIDI simply can't simulate that. Thank you for listening and providing your thoughts on this piece, it's something I spent a lot of time and energy on. Analysis: My Sonata for Piano and Saxophone in Eb major is cast in three movements. The last two are played without a break. The first movement is in a free form based on tempo transformation. (It’s essentially the form of the third movement of Brahms’ second symphony). The second movement, Romanza, is a simple, ternary form in Bb with an F minor middle section. It’s very beautiful but harmonically slightly troubled, somewhat unstable. The movement plays without a break into the third. The third movement is in a freely reworked version of sonata form. There is a slow, dramatic introduction for the piano alone which moves through various keys from F# minor to Eb major. Then follows “Cavatina I” a ternary form subsection. The A section of this is a pastoral tune in Ab minor over a pedal Ab. This then gives way to the B section, a modally ambiguous march. Then the A section returns. This gives way to “Fuga I” which is a fugue in Gb major over a Db pedal point (lasting almost the entire three and a half minute long fugue). This fugue is more dramatic than rhetorical, climaxing with an episode in Gb minor which is subverted into “Cavatina II”. This is the same music as Cavatina I, but formally inverted (the A section becomes the B section and vice versa). The march is heard in a more ornamental form for the piano alone. Then the pastoral tune, this time in Gb major over a pedal fifth in the bass of the piano. The march returns and leads directly into “Fuga II” This fugue uses as its subject a transformed version of the subject of Fuga I, itself a transformation and combination of the first movement’s “seed motive” (Eb - C - G - Bb - F - Eb) and the pastoral tune. This fugue is highly metrically complex, representing a transition and conflict between the considerable amount of 6/8 music, and the common time of the section that follows. The final passage of the finale is a chorale. The chorale introduces new melodic material (actually built from intervalic material from the introduction, which is a transformation of the first movement seed motive), but the harmony under it was carefully constructed: the entire finale is an elaboration on the harmonic progression (F# minor - D# diminished - Ab minor - Eb minor - Gb major - Bb minor - Eb major) heard in the introduction of the movement. The chorale is just another restatement of that harmonic progression, reaffirming the journey back to Eb major for the third time in the movement. The chorale-coda also gradually introduces a new rhythmic cell which crystallizes over the course of the passage, resulting in the final Eb major chords of the movement being sounded in the following rhythm: eighth note - dotted quarter - half note - dotted quarter - eighth note (- half note). This is a rhythmic palindrome, mirroring the harmonic palindrome which comprises the structure of the sonata as a whole.

Not sure how I missed this, I like it, and nice to hear an alto sax sonata!

This is my "Seven Sententiae for Clarinet, Op. 395". It is one of my most ambitious set of sententiae both in overall length and individual sententiae. It is also one of my greatest compositions for a monodic instrument. I hope that you enjoy listening to it and would welcome your feedback. Seven Sententiae for Clarinet, Op. 395.mp3 Seven Sententiae for Clarinet, Op. 395.pdf

I kinda prefer the new version :) Orchestration is pretty subjective so thank you for experimenting with my suggestions! I think you can remove the pizzicato in the bass in bars 15-17 (just have celli play).

Had a go at implementing some of these ideas below. Not sure about the pizz. in the celli and basses. It's an interesting effect; just maybe feels too aggressive for the material? Decided to keep the trombones and tuba for now, because I'd prefer to use the full brass section. (The score attached is for midi rendition only: so hasn't been tidied.) Menuet in C sharp minor (Ravel orchestration) #20 (midi).mp3 Menuet in C sharp minor (Ravel orchestration) #20 (midi).pdf

Thanks for checking, but everything looks normal on my end. If anyone else is experiencing issues with this forum though, let me know.

Hallo @Thatguy v2.0, this prelude is a piece I very loved and I wish I had composed it! 😀 It opens with a subject that – at the first glance – seems to be Baroque-like but introduces strong chromaticism in its second half, so that in mm. 5, when the second voice enters, it reminds me of Bach’s B minor fugue from the WTC I (BWV 869b). But now, in mm. 9, comes the surprise. The mood changes to a more „romantic“ feeling with the arpeggios. And that unexpected change now reminds me at numerous preludes (or fugues) from Shostakovich’s op. 87. I didn’t make an in-depth analysis, but I can see how you have constantly took benefit from using the initial thematic material, which for me emphasizes the effectiveness of counterpuntal technique. Even if I did not recognize more complete entries of the initial subject, I have the feeling that motifs from it recur, even sometimes in augmentation. I enjoyed your effort on articulation, including the pedalling and the rubato, and also the key signature change to Bb minor (or is it Db major?). All in all, a piece very much to my taste. Full of counterpoint, but not in the “Neo-Baroque” style, rather with contemporary harmonies and dissonances and a slight touch of Romanticism! By the way, I’m very curious to know how you’re organizing your preludes (since this is No. 16). Is it a complete cycle based on 16 of the 24 keys? I’m really looking forward to hearing more of them—and have I perhaps already missed one?

From the eyes of a pianist: One thing I feel you have not considered in your orchestration is the fact pianos have a sustain pedal. One thing clearly lacking is the sense of prolonged chords over an active line. In the video you linked, it has the pedal markings in place, so you can reference where Price does that. This is another key reason why your orchestration sounds empty. How to orchestrate this? As one example, I am going to link this video by Alex Heppelmann: https://youtu.be/sTZCFa7B6BA?si=vI-hAEGclgkSde-V Disclaimer, it is 27 minutes long, however, it's very thorough describing how to take a piano melody and use the orchestra to create some ideas of a piano sustain pedal. In my personal style, I will use the horns to sustain the harmony on long tones, while the strings pulse the harmony similar to what a piano score would do. If not this, I would swap the roles. The melody in this case, would be featured in woodwinds, another instrument family, or lead/solo instrument. Good luck to you and if you want to see some sample notation, let us know! This Fantasie is a very wonderful piece and I find it is so conversational. It really feels like an orchestra notated in the piano and in my opinion is an excellent piece to showcase the capabilities of the piano and a performer.

Hi @BlackkBeethoven The first PDF file that you've uploaded doesn't seem to be working, so I have to pause the YT video to compare your score to the original piece. I think you've chosen a very difficult piano piece to orchestrate. I am assuming it was your choice to orchestrate whatever piano piece you wanted since you say you like Florence Price so much. I could say more about your choice given that you knew you only had 4 minutes to work with and the piece is over 7 minutes long - but it's too late to bother about that now. This piece is difficult to orchestrate because of the many florid fioraturas/roulades that it contains. But there are things you could do to facilitate them throughout the orchestra. First, since the fioraturas in the beginning go all the way from the very high range to the moderately low, I would have made sure to give those to the strings since they have a more homogeneous sound throughout their range. So I'm surprised to see that you have just the Flutes/Piccolo on that part - that part is very thinly scored and isn't utilizing the full body of the orchestra. If I had my way with that part I would have given it to the woodwinds and the strings doubling each other + harp. I'm guessing you don't have harp. You've retained the piano staff in this score even though the piano doesn't play anything. I don't think you should have the piano play anything in this orchestration because it would most likely serve as a crutch to fill in holes that your orchestration should fill. Speaking of holes - in measure 6 you have the trombone start the low melody but then it's not continued for some reason. You score the melody more fully without fragmentation in measures 8 - 9. Throughout this whole introduction you really underuse the strings and I think for that reason the piece doesn't sound fully scored. Those are just my first impressions of the introduction of the piece. Good luck in your final and thanks for sharing!

Just looking for general feedback on a less adventurous work before I dive into a more involved work. I feel like advice on the use of harmony and motifs would improve most of my work, and I could develop those skills by learning to improve some of my existing work. Waltz in Eb.mp3

Hi everyone! I'm currently working on a 4 movement Piano Sonata in E minor, and I've already written the first movement, at around a little over 10 minutes in length alone. Im 15 years old, and although I'm a classically trained pianist studying at the peabody preparatory, I'm a self taught composer, so I'd appreciate any feedback on notation, structure, and really anything else that could benefit the piece, which could help me refine further. The piece is in sonata form, with the A and B themes in the exposition both lasting from m.1-163 (A - m.1-82, B - m.83-163), a development section (with a brief 24 measure Fugato on the main theme from m.21-37) lasting from m.164-219, and then the recap from m.220-293. The piece goes through many modulations, occasional complex polyrhythms, chromaticism, complex late-romantic/impressionist harmonies, cross-staff textures, delayed resolutions, distant key relationships, using "deceptive" major keys, and it ends the exposition in B major, the dominant, rather than G major the relative major. The development begins with the fugato in D# minor, and then after going through A# minor, G# minor, Ab major, breaking the fugato, and E major, it begins the recap back in E minor, moving through a few more keys to finally reach E major in the end. For this sonata, I'm very inspired by liszt (both his more virtuosic showpieces and his more introspective late works), especially with how he uses thematic development and combines "mephisto" drama with lyrical spirituality. In the beginning of my piece, you have the main motive of the entire piece, what I call the "B octave motive", since it's just octaves in both hands repeating the note B, but this single motive (both rhythmically and melodically) can be found in almost every section of the piece, from the tempestuous A theme, to the spiritual, watery and flowing B theme. The polar opposite contrast between the A and B themes creates both immense technical and musical demands for the performer, while still being idiomatic. Additionally, many of the ideas in this sonata, come from my own improvisations over the years, which I think helps give me a little bit of a distinct voice, but I'd like to know the perspectives of others. As I already mentioned, all feedback is appreciated! Note: the first link is me playing a slightly cut version of the exposition, and links 2 and 3 show me playing the parts I cut out from the first link. Links: https://youtu.be/MyptBsYMNiw https://youtube.com/shorts/-kIa8oVrUg4 https://youtube.com/shorts/_eLFRSilBzs https://youtube.com/shorts/_lOHz4Nz5qE https://youtu.be/qlEPGqwAq64 Piano Sonata in E Minor - Full Score.pdf

Thanks for posting @Sebastian Guzman ! It's been a while since I've listened to the Liszt B minor Sonata, but I am definitely getting vibes of it here (most assuredly from your B-octave motif). Your musical language in this work does feel very Lisztian to me, which is inclusive of the harmony and the piano textures, and that I mostly do mean as a compliment. I'm curious to know what other influences/inspirations you may have had while writing this movement though, as some sections do seem to draw from other wells of musical ideas (e.g. the harmonic movements in b. 91-105 felt distinctly modern to me). I confess that I am not really in a position to offer super helpful advice but I hope you'll find this useful anyway. I also don't mean any suggestion as an attack on your writing, of course, but as an exchange of ideas that you could optionally disregard :) Exposition The B-octave motif is very reminiscent of one of the motifs in the B minor Sonata, haha. I see that the majority of the dotted rhythm in this motif is the backbone for the rhythm of the A theme, if I am correct... I noticed in your trimmed-down video you seemed to have cut out b. 54-62 from the A theme and b. 105-118 from the B theme? Admittedly, I prefer the abridged version as I thought the material in question to be a little redundant, given that you do cover well and to great length both themes in the exposition. My thematic economy side of my brain would like to think that one should only state a theme until the listener is familiar enough with it to recognise said theme when it pops up in the development. If you wanted to keep said material for symmetry/form-related reasons/other personal preferences, though, by all means do so. I do love the B theme in all of its mellow sweetness, especially its first half. The second half of the B theme feels a bit static with the repeated notes, but coupled with the rolling left hand accompaniment, it does give a sense of floating/gliding, if that is what you desired. As I said, I quite like the harmony you move through in b. 91-105. A charming change in texture from b. 154 onwards! Development The fugato start of the development seems a bit dry? I can see where you are going with the material but I'm not super convinced by b. 164-187, though I suppose some pedal would help, or varying the articulation and texture a tad more even if a fugato. I didn't quite exactly get fugato vibes from it either, given how long the statement of the theme is. This is completely a suggestion, of course, and it is up to you as to how you'd like your sonata to work, but perhaps using only the first phrase of the theme (b. 164-166) and then building up a series of entries in other voices could be rather effective. I somewhat find this example to also be a bit dry, but I like the energy build-up of this fugato moment in the development of the fourth movement of Scriabin's Third Sonata, if you wanted something similar. Interesting, from b. 178 onwards in the fugato, you introduce another voice that is the B theme, or at least an echo of it, if I'm correct? I am a big fan of juxtaposing thematic material in the development sections of sonatas, if so... The material in b. 196-215 seems a bit overly virtuosic? I'm uncertain whether there might be some significance in the chords/harmonies you use here, but I think it'd be great to insert more of the existing thematic material in here, fragmented or whatnot. Overall, the development feels short to me, not in the least because I feel like you could've pulled out your compositional chops a bit more. Given the length of the exposition, I think this deserves a heftier development with varied treatment and inclusion of all three of the A and B themes and the B-octave motif. Trying to set the tempestuous A theme or the B-octave motif into the suave atmosphere/mood of the B theme, for example, or more chopping and changing, there are a wide variety of things you could do. Liszt can of course be a great source of ideas here! Recap Nice to restate the B-octave theme. Maybe the transition from the end of the development could be made smoother? I'm not sure though. I like the recasting of the textures in the recap of the A theme, but it feels a little airy? I'm not sure if you were going for that feel, and if you were, then I am in no place to complain. I suppose you could add some deep bass notes on the offbeats to give it a bit more body and hold them with your regular pedal, or see if the sostenuto pedal could work (though it could make the right hand arpeggios rather dry). I also appreciate the A theme being a bit shorter here... With b. 236 onwards and B theme, the energy seems to drop somewhat, with almost the exact statement of the original B theme but transposed. It is once again up to you, but you could also recap the B theme in a different texture, as you did with the A theme. I felt like the energy levels ought to have ramped up a bit more moving further and further down to match the energy of b. 282 onwards to the coda, possibly? At the moment, the ending feels mildly content with itself, though I would think the large chords and dynamics would suggest otherwise. With notation and formatting, I also admit I'm not the best person to offer advice, but there does seem to be the occasional odd things, e.g. whatever is stretching out b. 122 (the rest in the upper staff can also be removed there), the clipping of text at the end of the system at b. 248-250, and the slightly overzealous floating slur in b. 288. I've been told that with hairpins, it's best practice to state exactly which dynamic the hairpin starts and ends at, including double hairpins like < so >, but I am open to corrections. Yeah, that's most of what I have to offer with thoughts. Excellent playing, by the way, I almost forgot to mention! This already looks like a difficult sonata so far with this first movement and you interpreted it very pleasingly, at least to my ears, and in a very convincing way (though I suppose it is up to the composer yourself to decide whether it was served justice, lol).