Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 10/09/2019 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    Hi everyone, I've been composing music for 3,5 years, but it was not until recently I decided to start uploading my music to the internet. I've never received any musical education, I had to educate myself. The first piece I decided to upload is the "Sonata for Viola and Orchestra". Please note, that even though it says sonata in the title, I wasn't sticking to any particular composition form. I would appreciate any feedback you can give me on both my orchestration and composition and your thoughts in general. For the story behind the piece, you can check the description of the video attached here. My idea behind this composition was as follows: The motif that represents life gets introduced in the first part of the composition in a major key (0:00-0:56). Then the piece switches to a minor key and a "loss" motif start playing by a solo viola, representing the losses during the war. After the second repetition of the motif (1:00-2:24), the life motif comes back now in a minor key representing that life has changed for the worse (2:24-3:15). The loss motif is then repeated again and the piece concludes on an unstable minor add9 chord to show the uncertainty of the situation (3:15-4:30). The piece: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4jGyzvWlmY&lc=z221wrhqgxznjvopt04t1aokgbir4xpajzdb5agsljhlrk0h00410 The score is attached here Edit: Uploaded the piece here as well. For the history behind it, you should still check the link Edit 2: Replaced the previous pdf file with the new one, since I found some mistakes (had incorrect crescendo markings around bars 10-11)
  2. 2 points
    Hi, everyone I would like to introduce to you my new composition. It is Ballade #2 for piano. The composition was written in late romantic style. I tried to make it in classical traditions with clear music forms and simple, understandable melodies. I hope I accessed my goals at least partially.
  3. 2 points
    Hello Guys, I'd like to introduce my latest symphonic track, Monarch Butterflies. What do you think?
  4. 2 points
    Hi Everyone, I just recently finished my first "exact" composition for solo piano . Prior to this, I have been improvising and composing various themes for many years but this is the first time I went about trying to put together a coherent piece and notating it. I would love to hear what people think about it. Here's a link to my own performance ( with score) on youtube: Also, here's a link to the score (also attached as pdf) : https://musescore.com/user/25828516/scores/5759589/s/0aktCw I realize that some of the more difficult sections aren't a 100% clean in my performance. So those interested, could listen to a "100% accurate" but somewhat stiff/mechanical software (musescore) playback to evaluate those sections. ( I did my best to put hidden instructions in the software so it sounds less robotic ). I'm completely self-taught in music theory/composition and am trying to evaluate where I stand currently as far as my compositional skills are concerned. So, any kind of feedback would be highly appreciated. Also, here's a short description of the piece: The title of this piece alludes to the tendancy of this piece to drift from one style to another, from music of one period to another, from one mood to another. The music also tends to "drift" from a standard waltz form to music which has little resemblance to a waltz ( but may still maintain a slight waltz pulse) . Thank you very much !!
  5. 1 point
    If anyone here would like to sing over this or add instruments, lyrics, or melody (esp. To the little vamp section) let me know. Otherwise any feedback is appreciated 🙂
  6. 1 point
    This is a peaceful nocturne/ballad that gets continuously interrupted by stormy winds and dancing tangents. It's dramatic and heartfelt. Rushed and calm. This piece had two completely different versions written down before I decided to combine both of them into one, since I liked both. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGYNz7Mo-ow
  7. 1 point
    I was thinking of the movie "Creed" while making this. I wanted to make something cinematic that was driven and felt like the progress of a noble cause.
  8. 1 point
    Hello, This is my brand new track, called Outer Space Flying Dutchman. Do you know the legend of the Flying Dutchman? It's a very famous myth about a ghost ship, that can never make port and doomed to sail the ocean forever. I imagined this story in outer space, and this is the result. What do you think? Write below in a comment!
  9. 1 point
    If we're defining parallel harmony that way, look up the term "planing", specifically "chromatic planing".
  10. 1 point
    I see it this way: To define “parallel harmony”, it think it would be good to analise the term a little. Roughly speaking, harmony takes place when we play notes simultaneously, usually more than two. (That doesn’t necesarily mean that there is a key — although it may suggest it). When we have more than two of this combination of notes (called chords), we perceive the moving of the notes as “voices”: moving melodic lines. On the other hand, there are three basic forms of contrapuntual motion: oblique, contrary and similar. Parallel motion is a type of similar motion (or at least that’s a way to look at it). In similar motion, the two (or more) voices move in the same direction, but not necessarily result in the same interval as they started. In parallel motion, the two (or more) voices move in the same direction AND result in the same interval as they started. For example, if you have a set of notes C, E and G —in the same octave— and you move them up a minor third by parallel motion, you will get Eb, G and Bb. So, when we talk about parallel harmony, we mean that the voices that constitute the harmony move in parallel motion. If you search Parallel Harmony in Google, you’ll find several visual examples of that. The use of parallel harmony often results in “shifting to "unrelated" keys that are identical”, but it isn’t just that, so I wanted to make sure you know this. I hope it worked. Luis Hernández mentioned Debussy and I think it will be illistrative to look at his music. The first bars of this prelude by him use parallel harmony. Notice that in this piece not every possibility of parallel harmony is used. There are many cool things you can do with it! I hope it helps 🤔😁 P.S.: Also notice that some parallel movement in a piece of music doesn’t necessarily imply that the music has parallel harmony. I was listening to Corcovado by Darius Milhaud, and it has a bit of parallel motion in the harmonization of a melody, but that doesn’t mean that he is really using parallel harmony.
  11. 1 point
    Wow, this is amazing! Goosebumps! Your melodies make me feel a deep sense of longing, of a meaning to life I can only sometimes see.
  12. 1 point
    Hi! Now that you mentioned that you like to jump a major 3rd with this major and minor chords, you reminded me of Prokofiev. Have you seen how he uses chords (mostly major) in a non-functional manner? “Non-functional” meaning “used in a coloristic way”, or at least thats one way to look at it. Maybe you can check out this video if you haven’t already, to see what I mean: It’s not parallel harmony, but I thought it could help.
  13. 1 point
    Nice composition. I think it would fit better in 6/8, or 6/4 (in most parts) Until measurre 58 the rhythm remains constant with tuplets. Perhaps it's too much (for me, I would expect some variation). The second part ir more erratic. I see a lot of contrary motion, which is good. This part becomes passionate.... In m. 160 it comes back to the fist part. Here it seems that the rhythm of both hands was different, not vertically parallel, which is what we heard before. I like it, too.
  14. 1 point
    Cool! I enjoyed to listening this music. Your composition has bright orchestration, interesting harmonization and expressing melody. You showed a mastery in every elements of music language.
  15. 1 point
    Понравилось. У вас весьма насыщенная и красочная фактура. А еще мне понравилась текучесть - то, с какой легкостью, и главное естественностью, вы переходите от одного тематического образования к другому. Порою бывает непросто соединить такие непохожие мотивы и ритмы во что-то единое и при этом избежать отрывочности или калейдоскопичности.
  16. 1 point
    I think Nocturne fits the piece pretty well, especially as you get to Variation 1, which sounds very nocturnal. Those beginning arpeggios and the sinking bass though remind me of another piece I have heard, which also goes from slow to fast and vice versa like your piece does and just happens to be in the same key. That being Mozart's Fantasia in D minor, perhaps the closest I have heard Mozart get to Beethoven stylistically in piano solo outside of piano sonatas. Your tempo changes aren't nearly as drastic as the ones in Mozart's Fantasia in D minor, but they still remind me of that piece.
  17. 1 point
    Very somber and ethereal. I wish I could play the keys so elegantly. Well done.
  18. 1 point
    Sounds like a lost ship looking to kick some stellar butt out there somewhere. Very driving, well done. Might be interesting to see it stripped down to the percussion only, then built back up, as I love the beat. Take care.
  19. 1 point
    Wow!! I love this! You have a great way of navigating harmonically, and the build ups are very effective. The way the woodwinds flutter about really convey the flight of a butterfly! I'm flying! Thank you! :)
  20. 1 point
    Hello everyone! Recently this piece of mine premiered in Florence, Italy. Despite the tiny amount of rehearsal time (45 minutes only) I am quite happy with the result. The piece is dedicated to my grandma. The four movements describe the different stages of the Alzheimer’s desease. The themes in the first movement evolve and destroy themselves during the piece, as my grandma’s mind was losing all her memories. Any feedback is appreciated!
  21. 1 point
    It sounds dissonant, but at least you don't leave the dissonance hanging. The opening of this reminds me of a piece by Mozart. That being: His Dissonance Quartet, so called because the introduction uses a lot of dissonant harmonies before it goes into the consonant Allegro which is definitely in C major.
  22. 1 point
    Very nice! I enjoyed it. It is a light piece but never boring! I like the many variations of the initial theme utilizing different and rather unusual harmonics and modulations. But you always nicely combine, interspace or resolve them with classical harmonics. Altogether, this is an intriguing way to catch the attention of the listener.
  23. 1 point
    You probably already know about the "harmonic series" and overtones so I won't dwell on it here. Monarcheon can probably explain this better than I anyway. But it's about overtones. If you play a fundamental of, say, C(3) on a piano, the following notes also sound: C(4), G(4), C(5), E(5) - etc. You don't hear them separately (unless you're listening out for them). They're what gives the piano and every other instrument its timbre (along with a few other parameters). Note that the fundamental produces a harmonic that turns up as the Major 3rd in a triad. C-E-G. In a minor key, the 3rd is flattened. So in C minor: C Eb G. Thus a discord occurs between the major 3rd in the instrument's natural sound and the minor 3rd. It also explains why some instruments rich in harmonics sound angrier in a minor key than others. Compare a trio of horns (as in Peter and the Wolf for instance with the three flutes in the last movement of The Planets, The flute's lower register is weak in harmonics, the horns strong so the clash is greater.
  24. 1 point
    Short prelude I wrote on a theme I got while improvising. Written: July 31, 2019
  25. 1 point
    What? You have to realize that major and minor modes don't really mean anything and that your reaction to them is learned. In the transition between the Medieval and the Baroque, Willaert and Zarlino codified the minor thirds as sweetness and grief and major modes with harshness and bitterness (Burkholder, 249). Obviously completely contrary to what most people think today, but all it takes is a few hundred years to change what the world thinks.
  26. 1 point
    Thanks! I'm very glad you liked it. This is a huge compliment as Ravel is at the top of my favorite composers list.
  27. 1 point
    Hello everybody! I've just posted my first string quartet, called "Impetuous". Here's the link for it! I was very much inspired by Villa Lobos' 6th string quartet, and wrote the first movement with it in mind. It's called "Impetuous" because I was trying to convey the sense of progress and continuity through rhythmic impetuosity, instead of using harmony or any other technique to do so. Therefore, the staccato sound and counterpoint/imitation was of great use. Also, I'm currently working on the third and last movement of a Sonata for Oboe and Piano, so if you're interested in listening to it, please subscribe to my Youtube channel. I genuinely hope you enjoy the piece, and would love to get feedback on it! Thanks for your attention! Best wishes, Jean.
  28. 1 point
    I love this! It reminds me of "The Nightmare Before Christmas" soundtrack, which is a masterpiece, and one of my favourite pieces ever. (I meant that as a huge compliment) Every thing feels in place, and I would definately listen to more of it! Good job! Best wishes, Jean.
  29. 1 point
    I really like that moment at the end of measure 8. I also like the atonality in the second movement, although I think harmonically it could be explored a bit further (although I don't know if that would change what your vision for this piece was). Really like what you did at measure 98 for some reason haha that dissonance is cool. The last movement was really interesting, I don't really know how to play with dissonance so brazenly like that yet so that was cool to hear.
  30. 1 point
    And these happen to be my favorite influences, as well. No wonder I liked your waltz so much!
  31. 1 point
    First of all, a big Thanks for such an inspiring feedback. I really appreciate you taking the time to give me detailed comments. Chopin was definitely an influence throughout. My other main influences in this piece would be Ravel, Debussy and to an extent Prokofiev, and even a bit of Gershwin. The part starting at M.118 was one of the most exciting ideas I had while composing this, so I'm especially thrilled that other people are appreciating it too 🙂 . Indeed, I spent a significant amount of time trying to make sure I was as clear as possible in all my details ( also with things like enharmonic spellings ... ) . It's hard work !! and lastly .. The harder parts of this piece were a bit beyond me to begin with, and took a LOT of disciplined effort for me to get to this point ( I was inspired by remembering how Ravel practiced so hard to be able to premier his concerto , even though he couldn't in the end) . So its especially encouraging to hear such comments as yours. Thanks again for your encouragement, and I'll get started on the next piece right away !
  32. 1 point
    Hey! I quite like this. However, I think the rhythms could be worked a bit. I feel like the tenuto you're using will sound better if you have a slower tempo. Personally, I believe that if you want to keep this tempo, you should connect the chords a little bit better, maybe adding a long pedal note, adding a bit more rhythmic diferenciation between the voices, etc. That will better showcase the harmonic material you have going on, which I feel is weakened by the current arrangement. This piece has potential, but it needs some more work. I hope my opinion was of any help! Best wishes, Jean.
  33. 1 point
    Hi @fililando, thanks for posting! I really enjoyed that. The lyrical character caught me from the first bar all the way throught the 14min. Nice score and life recording....Harmony remind me sometimes of Mahler.
  34. 1 point
    OK, but you keep thining in those classic terms all the time, and that's fine. From my point of view (not only mine, thank God) those forms have trascended from what they exactaly were into other things. It's like if you take "the idea" or "your idea" of what a sonata is, not thinking in its exact structure and rules. If not, how do you explain, for example, the Sonata for Cello and Piano by Webern (atonal) lasting about 2 minutes? The composers named it Sonata. Was he wrong? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6fcALtNgIA
  35. 1 point
    Call it as you like. It's just a name. And without calling it something very odd to the name, why not? I think forms are important issues to know about, but taking them in strict sense only enforces to the pieces of the classics. We are in 21st century, no longer in 18th..., so you can do whatever you want. (In fact, I think we should). Regarding the music I think it's a balanced piece and very catchy. I like the variation in the parts, and also the modulations are very soft.
  36. 1 point
    Thank you very much ! and my apologies as I didn't post a description of the piece before ( I've updated that in the original post now) but here it is anyway: The title of this piece alludes to the tendancy of this piece to drift from one style to another, from music of one period to another, from one mood to another. The music also tends to "drift" from a standard waltz form to music which has little resemblance to a waltz ( but may still maintain a slight waltz pulse) . So, the somewhat capricious nature of the piece is intentional. It was my hope that there would be some structural unity provided by the fact that , aside from the section towards the end, a good part of the composition involves variation of quite a few themes. For example, the part from around 1:25 -1:35 and then 2:15-2:25 employ identical or very similar sequence of notes but in entirely different contexts, hence sounding quite different. I apologize If I'm being too detailed here ! On second thoughts, I suppose by definition this could be thought of as a medley of sorts , but it wasn't intended as such ! 🙂
  37. 1 point
    Very impressive! Beautiful string writing all around. I have one minor critique: The first movement repeat (bar 18) to the beginning seems...disjointed. Bar 18 is a perfect setup for the next section, but its a little jarring when it repeats to the beginning. But overall, great job! The orchestra sounds marvelous as well!
  38. 1 point
    I happen to be a neurologist who treats Alzheimer's patients so I found your background of this piece quite intriguing. Like Tonskald, the Danza movement was my favorite but this is a splendid work all around. There is great balance among the parts which would make it fun to play. The violas especially would welcome the interesting part writing.
  39. 1 point
    Such rich harmonies and sonorities! I liked this a lot, but my favorite movement was the Danza. You're very good at writing (and scoring) for strings! I'm glad you were able to have this performed—it certainly deserved it.
  40. 1 point
    Impressive! I like it a lot. In some parts it reminds me of Puccini (Crisantemi), also the writing of Richard Strauss. But this one speaks by itself.
  41. 1 point
    It sounds very nice. I wish it had some rest, anywhere. At 1:30... when I thought the relative calm would come, it gains in speed, which is a good effect. But the tension is in the whole piece....
  42. 1 point
    At first I thought you had switched to Philip Glass style but, bit by bit, you went into that post-romantic idiom....
  43. 1 point
    It depends on the context and what you want. They sound coherente together.
  44. 1 point
    The first one has some "aggresive" sounds, and with all those arpeggios up and down. Although I suppose it fits with the project. The second is lovely and pleasant, nice clashes in harmony. The third is quite good, I love the broken rhythms and that sort of oriental flavor.
  45. 1 point
    I'm focusing on ice world because I love snow and winter 🥰 The interval stacks are nice but get a little repetitive, and it's super noticeable because of the register. I think what made me get a little tired of them too was the fact that they follow in the harmony as though in diatonic planing. I think maybe having given it a little more flavor by inverting it to form a sort of stacked voice set would have been really nice. Your melody and rhythmic mixups are great and really help this get off the ground from the getgo. Your triplets later are super great as well.
  46. 1 point
    Hi there, I postet this piece almost exactly five years ago in a very early version (it was actually more of a MIDI mockup) and now in the last few weeks I've been working on it again very intensively. The whole thing was recorded with new and – hopefully – more realistic orchestral samples and re-arranged here and there. I would be happy to get some feedback, especially on the mix or the sound in general and what could be improved. Synthetically realizing an entire orchestra on a PC is really a science in itself (at least for me) and I must honestly admit that it took me at least two to three times as long for recording and mixing in the sequencer that for the actual composition in the notation program. https://soundcloud.com/dustin-naegel/a-swashbucklers-fanfare-1 As a video with excerpts from both score and sequencer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1qQsuz7TPg Thanks for your feedback :) Dustin
  47. 1 point
    This is a great discussion point - and one that I think the world of composition needs. There is no secret that I am a tonal composer. It's just the music I enjoy writing and listening to. As a composer, whichever combination of tones you use will create something that is unique to you, whether is be 5, 7, 8, or 12. Provided you are not copying a piece directly, then it is original enough. The biggest problem comes from exposure. Why would a (paying) audience go to see a symphony by an unknown composer which sounded Classical, rather than their favourite Mozart one. Here lies the problem with originality - performances. Bottom line, if you want to write tonally, do it. It's still original. However atonal music is more likely to be performed, which brings me to the next point. I, as a composer, want to write music that I enjoy. If someone tells you what style of music you should write, then that will ruin the enjoyment of music for you. This is the problem with conservatoires, who tend to only accept people with an avant-garde style which they consider to be more original. Not to attack John Cage, but silence? Seriously!? Disclaimer: I mean no disrespect to atonal/avant-garde composers. You are all equally skilled and creative. I just personally don't like the style. If even one other person besides me listens to my music and enjoys it, then I feel like I have succeeded in a way. I would like to get my music performed but composition isn't my main pursuit in music so I don't mind as much. New music ensembles tend to only want to perform avant-garde pieces, and traditional orchestras generally do not accept pieces from budding composers. As a composer, I want to reach out to other musicians and show them what I have worked on. You could say I am trying to "revolutionise music" because I want to show the world that tonal composers still flourish, even though they are looked down on by competitions and festivals. I thought about this a few months ago. I love the works of the greats from the last few centuries. It appeals strongly to me, because my ear - as most ears do - perceives it as right. Tonal music is designed to be pleasant - but that doesn't mean it is limited to what most non musicians think classical music is. Take two birds sitting on a branch. One sings tonally, the other races rats over a finish line and sings the notes in the order that they place. Which one will get a mate? The ear - our ear, an ant's ear, a bird's ear - likes the harmonic relationship between the frequencies of a tonal scale. My style, as I have said before, is tonal, but I like to experiment with the changing harmonies caused by a chromatic movement. Listen to this simply beautiful piece by Grieg. I didn't play it for a while, because from looking at the score I could see it had a lot of chromaticism. But it is still tonal, and this is what I try to write. I don't count myself as a pastiche of Grieg, because I draw my style from another source. Scotland has a rich traditional music heritage, and if you listen carefully to some of my most recent music (not posted here yet) you can hear the influences from playing fiddle in a school folk band. I even write specific Scottish traditional pieces to play in the group, although that is not the main part of my output. My style? Tonal×Accidentals×Scottish Music Music is so subjective. Thanks for sticking with me, it's my longest post ever.
  48. 1 point
    This is a good topic for discussion; thanks for bringing it up! I think each of us creates "original" music in the sense that we as composers create works of music that are uniquely our own. True, they may resemble certain styles and forms of other composers—I'm not sure one can ever escape that since all of our musical ideas are built upon stuff we've heard before and internalized. As we become more experienced, we're able to remove ourselves farther away from those influences, so our music slowly takes on its own voice. As to the "style" of originality as defined by the classical music elites, I'm stumped there. The style of music heralded by the elites as "purely original" is, as you mentioned, atonal. Proponents of atonal music posit that it's a musical era just like Romantic or Impressionism, but I disagree; up until the Modern/Postmodern era of classical music, composers followed the natural "rules" of music. Debussy (an Impressionist for those following along at home) did some weird things with tonality but he obeyed the rules. The human ear is wired to interpret certain pitch relationships as consonant and others as dissonant—and these days, some as purely chaotic. Modern/postmodern classical music, with its strong atonality, is the first musical movement to actually rebel against this natural rule, or at least disregard it, in the hopes of staying original. So, all this to say that modern composers have abandoned tonality because they believe there's nothing "original" left to be had there. Again, I disagree. It takes a lot more work and creative thinking to find an original voice in the world of tonality, but it's entirely possible—and very satisfying! I've a hunch that the great composers of our generation remembered 100 years down the road will not be the progressive, 12-tone serialists churning out mind-boggling, gut-wrenching cacophonies; rather, it will be those who continued to tinker with tonality and made music that meshed with the human soul. My goals are rather simple: write music that I like. I'd much prefer to revolutionize music than reach a big audience, but (for reasons mentioned above) I don't feel like that's going in the direction of the current avant-garde styles. There's still hundreds of years' worth of exploring to do in the world of tonality! So how original do we need to be? Well, be as original as you want to be! Some people create amazing works that sound like Beethoven or Mozart could have written. Others' sound like something from an outfit from Mars. The problem I find is that composers are either cliché tonal composers (little musical training) or else they're atonal. This probably has to do with the fact that atonal music is the prima donna right now among the elites; atonal music will receive the most praise (and it's difficult to criticize since it doesn't follow a lot of rules), so "serious" composers seek originality via that route. If there are atonal composers reading this, please don't get the wrong impression! I respect your compositional styles 100%; my point is that atonal music is not the sole arbiter of originality. As you might have guessed, my music is strongly tonal. However, I use a rich combination of chords throughout so it doesn't sound too cliché. In fact, I hate having to use conventional chord progressions; I strive to avoid them when I can. My works have a strong thematic element to them but are rarely melody-driven (in other words, not like Tchaikovsky and other Romantics). I also use a lot of unconventional modulations that loosely tie to the previous key. And I love counterpoint—I always try to use it when I can. It helps ensure that all players have "interesting" parts to play! I guess I'm describing Impressionism, and maybe that category best fits my musical style. Anyone is welcome to take a listen to some of my stuff and give their own opinion. 🙂
  49. 1 point
    I don't know how much music history you've studied up to this point, but this whole notion of material-based originality came from the genesis of the Romantic era, where the advancement of middle-class music making along with the general advancement of music printing/publishing combined. Composers started using super fancy/exotic-sounding titles and used increased harmonic changes to be more expressive and have their pick at the newly free market. I'll elaborate on my own opinions/answer more of the proposed questions if this discussion gets more lively, but I'm more a fan of the way the Classical era dealt with originality, where quality was based upon how well you could use old forms and conventions in your own style/ways. It doesn't sound very modern to us because it was their styles, but Haydn's and Beethoven's music were pretty novel when they were written. The modern era has taken this Romantic ideal of expression and newness to its extreme, trying to push progress without having the patience for it. The elitism and high-artness of modern classical music generally glosses over the music most people will listen to; how subtle its changes are to formulas, but how effectively catchy the songs are. Maybe my thoughts on this will change over time.
  50. 1 point
    This piece started out as the opening bars to movement II, which came to me while trying to sleep one night. The basic idea of movement III is one that I've had in my head for a couple years, ever since I wrote my first wind band piece in 2016/17. After that, movement I started with just me putting down notes to see what would happen. I've tried to experiment more with having instruments 'bleed' into each other (you can see this mostly in movement II), which is something I don't see much in most wind band writing. I haven't really pushed my harmonies that much (by my standards anyway) - I'm a bit reluctant to do that in a wind band context, because I don't think there's as much leeway as there is in the orchestral world, and I don't even feel a strong need to just yet. At the same time, though, I'm really proud of quite a lot of this piece, and I think it shows a few things that you can do with harmonies without necessarily pushing them to their absolute limits. I've tried to play around a bit with traditional wind band expectations, especially with regards to percussion, and I will continue to do so. I've always wanted to give a melodic solo to the temple blocks, for instance, and finally did so here in movement III. I also rebelled a little against using bass drum/cymbals in the traditional accompaniment oom-pah way, which is why I gave them a solo too. I worry a little that the movements are a little short, because I think each one could potentially go on for a full 5-6 minutes at least with their material. However, short individual movements is pretty common in wind band writing, and if the piece as a whole has a consistent feel and sound then I think it still works.
×
×
  • Create New...