Jump to content

danishali903

Moderators
  • Content Count

    339
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    29

danishali903 last won the day on February 28 2017

danishali903 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

144 Excellent

7 Followers

About danishali903

  • Rank
    Advanced Composer

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Troy, MI
  • Interests
    Music (duh), Movies (good ones), Books (the classics)
  • Favorite Composers
    Mahler, Bartok, Beethoven, Mozart, Tchaikovsky, Brahms, JS Bach, JC Bach, John Williams, Vaughn-Williams, Stravinsky, Rachmaninoff, Prokofiev, Rimsky-Korsakov, Ravel, Shostakovich, R. Strauss
  • My Compositional Styles
    Neo-romantic, neo-classical
  • Notation Software/Sequencers
    finale 2014.5 and GPO 4
  • Instruments Played
    Violin, Viola

Recent Profile Visitors

9,315 profile views
  1. This is quite impressive! Some parts reminded me of something Schubert would write, some had a more Rachmaninoff quality to them. Beautiful recording as well. It'd be nice to see a score too. If you need a violist in the future, I am at your service 🙂
  2. It's a very introspective work, just like the title suggests. I'm not a clarinetist so I can't comment on the technical stuff, but it sounds playable. It would be beneficial to include the score. Overall, great job!
  3. It'd be interesting to hear a live performance of this work, the mockup doesn't do it justice (as always). The music's atmosphere is reminiscent of a movie score. If you do ever work on this piece more/revise it, I would develop the middle section a little more (starting at bar 67). That whole section just felt out of place...(mostly)harmonically and (somewhat) rhythmically. This might be a personal preference, but when I don't like seeing the 8va dash thing...I prefer to read the actual note. I try to avoid using the 8va as much as I can, I think you can too especially in the beginning of the piece for the first violin. You can probably keep it at the end. Also, string tremolos are noted by 3 slashes.
  4. I would call this piece a Passacaglia rather than a Canon...technically the infamous Canon in D is also passacaglia. Not a wind player so can't get THAT technical, but some of those figures in the horn parts (around measure 29) seem difficult, plus the range is a little too high for horn.
  5. What an unusual chamber set up, but very effective! Loved the whole piece.
  6. Very catchy, very Tchaikovsky-ish. The piece loses its charm a bit in the B/trio section (around measure 131). I agree with @maestrowick about adding a counter melody there (probably would work best with a cello/horn combo). Overall, pretty good though. In terms of orchestration, you need to better use the 2nd player of each group (ex. flute 2, oboe 2, etc.). The 2nd violin part could benefit from doubling down an octave in same places, like measure 38. In measure 62 (and whenever that reappears), the wind figures will most definitely by drowned out by the strings. This should be reinforced by the clarinets and bassoons...maybe the harp. Side note: most orchestras will only have one piccolo player doubling flute 3...something to keep in mind. The horn parts could use some love, they'll definitely be bored out of their minds. I personally would've added another trombone and tuba to reinforce the bass notes...but that's just me.
  7. Besides what @aMusicComposer mentioned (which is really good advice), the piece lacks formal structure and is not very "rhapsodical". I think each idea could be developed a bit more. The piece loses its energy at rehearsal C, which is a shame since I liked what was going on at B.
  8. 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!
  9. I don't quite understand what you mean by that. When you're reducing a piece meant for 40-50 players to a piece for 7 people, you are going to lose that "power" regardless of the piano. My main gripe is not with the addition of the piano, its the way it's used in the ensemble. I'm not a pianist myself so I can't really give you any feedback about how to write for the instrument. I can recommend you to listen to Liszt's transcription of the Beethoven symphony and see how transcribes/arranges the piece for solo piano (you can find the score at IMSLP.com) Just to nitpick...those aren't "tremolos". They're just a short-hand way of writing 8th notes, which most composers do use. It's just in figures like those that you must "spell out" your notation clearly. You are assuming that the musician who plays your piece is already familiar with it (in this case most people probably are)...just a good habit to make it easier for musicians by spelling it out.
  10. In the days of Beethoven, there was a trend by music publishers to make arrangements of symphonic works for smaller ensembles for publicity and money-making reasons. For better or worse, that trend continues today...There are like gazillion (ok maybe not a gazillion, but a couple hundred) “official” and “unofficial” arrangements of Beethoven symphonies (and other works...most notably the piano concerti that have been arranged for a “piano quintet” ensemble). This can be seen on IMSLP under the different arrangements/transcriptions posted there. I personally have played two different arrangements of the 5th Symphony for String Quartet. I think we talked about this in another post of yours, but all these arrangements sacrifice the integrity of the piece in question...with varied results. As for this arrangement...I found it confusing. The music and structure is unchanged, so that’s good! It’s the instrumentation that is puzzling...mostly the addition of the piano. I think this might’ve worked (and have been more of an interesting arrangement) if it was arranged for piano and string quartet (or quintet). According to your reasoning, the piano was added to basically fill in the wind voices, which makes perfect sense! But 3/4s of the time, the piano is mostly doubling the violin melodic line and the bass line in the double bass. I think you’d be better off having an expanded wind section for your chamber ensemble (maybe a woodwind quartet and string quintet combined to make a nonet). You also note that only 1 flute is required, yet there are multiple areas where there two notes in the flute staff in one measure, indicating 2 players (like measure 44 and onwards). A single viola CANNOT play the double stops in measures 44-51...just impossible. There are some notation errors, most notably in measures 6-23 (I think the flute and piano left hand are the culprits here). Double check your harmonies in measures 79 and 80 too. There are some bad notation practices that you should avoid. Whenever a figure like in 158-159 (half note tied to half note with slash), write out the eight notes in 159, because that looks really confusing. I really think you should also write those bass notes an octave lower 5 bars before the end...that is just asking for trouble.
  11. This! This is the reason I dread arranging/orchestrating piano-specific pieces...especially for a small chamber group (such as a string quartet). Unless you plan on making this arrangement for a string orchestra, adding the double bass is pointless in my opinion. I am not totally familiar with this piece, so I can't really give any advice unless I know the context of what Beethoven wrote and what you have written so far. Just looking at the excerpt above, I personally would make the whole thing an octave higher starting the end of the 4th bar (with the Eb). Then three before the end, instead of the octaves going up, I would do the opposite....so the Bb(right below middle C) to the low Bb. Even though I don't know the piece, I'm pretty sure the half-note sforazandos are more important than the 8th note accompaniment, so I don't think the voice crossing issue you raised would be a problem. Not the best solution, but I think it just might work in your case.
  12. I think you'll be fine with either being a judge OR an entrant. Let me know what you decide. Does that mean you'll enter...? Cause I hope you do :)
  13. To your first question: yep! I think that mostly would be for the string parts than anything else. But if you're gonna use the entire string section, I don't think you have to be THAT specific in terms of how many players in each section. As to your 2nd question, that is a little bit more subjective. I think the best example would be to look at all the orchestrations of Pictures at and Exhibition, and see (and hear) how each composer approaches each section and adds something new.
  14. Young Composer’s Spring 2017 Competition Spring is in the air! This competition is going to be a little different than most others, and will be a based on the following scenario: A regional chamber orchestra is commissioning composers to orchestrate three spring months, specifically March, April, and May, from Pytor Ilyich Tchaikovsky’s piano work, The Seasons Op. 37a. The orchestra has the following instrumentation available: 2 Flutes (both can double piccolo) 2 Oboes (2nd oboe can double English horn) 2 Clarinets (Bb, A, Eb, bass clarinet doublings allowed) 2 Bassoons (2nd Bassoon can double Contrabassoon) 3 French Horns 2 Trumpets 1 Trombone 3 Percussionists (including timpani) 1 Harpist 8 1st Violins 7 2nd Violins 5 Violas 4 Celli 2 Contrabass TOTAL of 44 players The orchestration of all the movements must feature at least 14 players from the orchestra. Entries that exceed the instrumentation listed above (44 players) will be disqualified. Please try to keep the instrumentation as consistent as possible for all three movements. To enter this competition you must meet the following requirements: Be a member of YC Signal your desire to enter by May 15th by commenting on this thread. At the time of submission, submit a score with proving that you meet the instrumentation requirements (NO EXCEPTIONS), and an audio mockup (MIDIs are acceptable). We also want members of this site to volunteer their time to judge. If you do volunteer, I ask that you have some working knowledge of orchestration. Entries will be scored on the following (these guidelines are somewhat general at the moment, but might be expanded upon later): Orchestration - How well does the entrant write for his chosen ensemble? Does the entrant exploit different colors through different instrumental combinations? Does he add any originality to the work? 35 PTS Instrumentation - How well does the entrant write for each specific instrument? 30 PTS Quality of Score 25 PTS Quality of Audio 10 PTS TOTAL 100 PTS Please observe the following deadlines: Signal to enter or volunteer to judge: May 15th, 2017 Entries must be submitted by June 4th, 11:59 PM EST I have attached a PDF of the three movements in question to this thread. Happy orchestrating, and good luck! DO NOT SUBMIT ENTRIES ON THIS THREAD Entrants: 1. Monarcheon Judges:
  15. I like how @Monarcheon picked Thoroughly Modern Mille (such a fun musical)! I guess my broadway dream conducting would be for Phantom of the Opera and Carousel. In terms of concert/opera music: 1. Rite of Spring and/or Petrushka- Stravinsky 2. ANY Mahler work 3. Beethoven's Symphony 7 4. The WHOLE Ring Cycle 5. Ravel's Daphne et Chloe (the ballet, not the suites) 6. Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet (again the ballet, not the suites) 7. Berg's 3 Pieces for Orchestra 8. John Adams' Short Ride in a Fast Machine oh there are so many more....
×
×
  • Create New...