Monarcheon

Hi @PeterthePapercomPoser, thanks for the kind words. Yes, a lot connects to the original them in some way, but obviously in a way that's idiosyncratic to me, right? There are some very obvious things like this... ...and there are other pretty obvious quotes: mm. 17–18 are just the latter half of the main theme's antecedent phrase, mm. 19–20 are a condensed version of the antecedent as a whole (<E, G, C, D, E, F, (E,) D, G>), and the notes for the tremolo parts are the first three notes of the theme (<E, G, C>). But then there are just decisions that I made artistically. For instance, I think the idea that the main melody of the non-introductory carol can be condensed into a pentachordal diatonic subset with only one semitone is very fascinating, so I emphasized the semitone throughout my setting as like an opposite to diatonicity. So lots of semitonal dyads (both harmonic and melodic) all about. Sounds rough, which I like, and also meets the design philosophy. For example, passages like m. 16 where there are both ic1s and ic2s, which, to me, emphases that friction between the diatonic and chromatic. But, to be honest, I didn't think that hard about it, haha. Most of the time, I just kinda liked the dissonance 🙂 I think the fact that you can hear echoes of the original is way more interesting than having every single thing be attached to it. Thanks again for your eyes and ears!

Lovely little piece. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that a chain of secondary dominants works so well as a fugue subject, but I think you bring out its fullest potential. It makes little moments like mm. 32–33 so lovely because it's so diatonic but keeps the spirit of the sequence. Really cool to see what parts of the theme you kept and selected in certain parts. I think m. 37 is the only bar that I'm not as big a fan of: the P5 (vaguely on ii?) into A4 (vii˚) feels a just the tiniest bit awkward because (I think? I've been having a hard time trying to think of a reason...) the third is neglected twice.

My submission for the event can be found here:

Hello, all. Coming at you with something a little different for the event, but I hope you find it at least interesting, even if you don't particularly like it. I've basically decided to get really good at writing for strings nowadays, and since I'm mostly an atonalist, cello is the easiest since computers can't play that kind of stuff; the implied timbres are super important. So enjoy hearing me poorly play this miniature fantasia on Jingle Bells. I promise there's a method to the madness 😄

I'm game. Vamos a ver que podemos hacer.

I'm more of a voice-leading kinda gal, but I came up with this on the fly. I have no idea if it works in the context of your own work, but in general, I'd advise starting with moving lines that mesh well, then filling in gaps. Happy accidents happen all the time!

@PeterthePapercomPoser Hmm, I'm not exactly sure what you mean; I don't see anything missing on my end. I didn't replace the file with anything, just changed my explanation!

@PeterthePapercomPoser Oopsie, yep, fixed. (Unless it was a bass oboe 😮)

Huge disclaimer: I am not an oboist. But I'd imagine it really depends on what you need the oboe to do. My first immediate thoughts go to the intro in Haydn's oboe concerto which, if I remember correctly, holds onto C6 for quite a while. It does go up to D at the end of the first movement, but only on a non-diatonic chord, so that extra brightness is warranted. Even then, it's really short. I compare that to his contemporaries' concerti, Mozart's, Kozeluch's, and Ferlendis's. On a quick scan, I don't much see anything past C in any of them, though I see some similarities to Haydn's: Kozeluch is also comfortable holding onto C5 for a while and Mozart uses D5 as a brief note in a higher moment. From what I remember for Ferlendis's, it plays it pretty safe, all things considered. I don't have the music, but a quick Google search shows that nothing over C5 is really lingered on. For that reason, my gut tells me to say that C5 is where you edge out for longer, full-bodied sounds and things above it like D5, etc., can be used quickly on occasion, but not in the same way as C5, and certainly not commonly. But that's all conjecture; I don't actually know the ins and outs. Luckily I write modern music, so those suckers have to deal with whatever I give them, hee hee hee!

I've always prioritized voice leading in my chord construction; sometimes, I just slap a root on there and it works out! Thank you both for listening!

As a cellist, I personally like seeing the downwards arpeggio line, but I suspect Scriabin wrote it the way he did because he wanted to specify that the root(?) occurred on the beat. I see both having merit in different cases, but—generally—the arp. line is probably fine.

I LOVE variations. Webern isn't necessarily my favorite composer musically, but philosophically, the ability to say a lot with a little is definitely my style. I think you've done the same thing here. That being said, I'd actually suggest you make the Theme a little longer. Even Paganini's 24th Caprice theme has a clear A and a B section despite being so short and I think it really helps to balance the rest of the piece. Whether or not you incorporate it a lot into the other variations is up to you, obviously, but starting with something a little fuller might be nice. Who knows, you appear to be proficient enough to maybe even try to see if you can notice any commonalities in your variations and derive a B-section theme from that; that would be super cool if you could. Generally speaking, this is super wonderful to listen to, you should be very happy with it! I'm always a sucker for good counterpoint, so I think I like Variation 1 the best, but Variation 2 had so much beautiful stuff (see below). One of the hardest things composers struggle with (myself included!) is balancing moving lines and harmony and you have an excellent command of it! Other stupid taste things that my ears caught when listening: Theme, mm. 5–6: The contrapuntal lines of both V1 and V2 in m. 5 feel like they should convene and the jump in V2 feels a little sudden. A small figure to support that upwards movement could help. Var 1, m. 26: It could just be the soundfont, but is there any way you can throw a G in there? The <F, Bb, C> progression feels oddly quartal amidst the rest of the tonality. Var 1, m. 51: The parallel minor ninths between V2 and Cello that "resolve" to the octave feel a little odd to me, maybe because the supported harmony isn't particularly clear either (not that that's a bad thing). Like, the cello seems to want to support ii˚6, but the upper voices are on v. Var 2, mm. 1–2: In contrast, I love the parallel major sevenths between the cello and viola at the beginning of this variation. Such a strong and confident opening gambit. Var 2, mm. 5, 15: Maybe you're looking for "portamento" in the cello? If I saw glissando, I would think the entire dotted quarter's length would be spent sliding. Var 2, mm. 8–9: Love the little V1 figure! Could be pizz. for a little extra definition? Var 2, mm. 21–end: This is so wonderful. My body got chills and the contrast is so well set-up that the big change felt effortless. Well done! For the cello, if might be worth specifying if you want a rolled pizz. or not, because they'll see that and ask. Var 3: Someone listened to Ravel's quartet, eh? I think, here, the contrast between the tremolo and the rest of it works well, but could be better supported for contrast. The fifth movement of the Ravel, for example, keeps a little tremolo (or basically tremolo) figure throughout to keep that energy up. Even if you don't do that, a line that moves some more would help set the contrast a little better, in my ears—maybe not even the first time, but the second time? Like, the second movement of Symphonie fantastique does that implicitly with a second melody that is inherently faster, with 16th notes.

I wrote a ballet a few years back! Notes aren't too hard since it would've had to been prepared pretty quickly, but I've always been more about screwing around with rhythm and meter, anyway. Forgive the recording quality: I had to make to scratch tracks and I only play cello, so I had to record all the parts except the bass and piano (except the plucking) 😅 Maybe I'll upload the other movements later, but this one is pretty interesting on its own, I think.

See my attached notes; sorry, I only marked the first version, not the second. I'd say if there's one thing to really focus on, it's making sure that your harmonies are very clear. Even if they're not yet completely functional (Baroque, sure), they do need to be very precise. I notice you use a lot of 4ths and 9ths or melodic configurations that result in fourths or ninths, and they're very hard to tell what the harmony is because the inversion is ambiguous. You'll see I marked a few things consistently: obviously try to fix parallel perfect consonances, but we also need to avoid parallel dissonances as well, especially in a two-voice texture. Speaking of parallel perfects, in a measure-for-measure harmony piece like this one, you need to make sure you're avoid parallel perfect consonances in first species; you can't just get away with it by adding some passing notes.

You must have orchestral pieces that you really like? Maybe even, like, film scores or musical theater scores? When I first got started soooooo long ago, I would spend hours listening, replaying, transcribing, and writing everything that I heard. And holy hell, I definitely got better because I was engaging my brain in piecing everything together. Copying note-for-note is alright (as long as you're listening alongside it), but transcribing it arguably even better. And, bonus, you get to practice transcription too! But yeah, basically, don't be so beholden to the original work, is my biggest advice. There's a reason that every collegiate composition course in the world has you take a very, very short piano miniature and orchestrate it. I remember my class took Ligeti's Musica ricercata, II., and orchestrated it. Super short, and literally only three notes. It was hard. But with practice—and creativity—it all comes together.