Jump to content

caters

Old Members
  • Content Count

    230
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

caters last won the day on February 14

caters had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

27 Excellent

6 Followers

About caters

  • Rank
    Advanced Composer

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Favorite Composers
    Beethoven, Mozart, Bach, Chopin
  • My Compositional Styles
    Classical, Romantic
  • Notation Software/Sequencers
    Musescore
  • Instruments Played
    Piano

Recent Profile Visitors

3,911 profile views
  1. So, you're suggesting that I double the length of all the notes of the first theme and consequently the transition(I take a motive from the first theme and sequence it for my transition, adding some countermelody between entries of the motive in each instrument), even the already long double half notes? Thus turning this: into this:
  2. I guess not, since I have already gotten started on a more lyrical second theme(I have the cello melody of the second theme settled, and now I'm figuring out how to accompany it in the piano) for the piece. It's just that I have never had a tempo mismatch to this degree before, even with dotted rhythms and sixteenth note rich pieces, so I wasn't expecting my "Adagio" to feel like an Allegro. At most I was expecting maybe a slow Andante feel if there was going to be a tempo mismatch.
  3. Okay, so I am writing this "Adagio" piece for piano and cello after a bout of composer's block. At the beginning 8 bars, I have a very rhythmic theme in C major. This rhythm gives the feel that it is at an Allegro tempo. But the tempo that is notated is an Adagio tempo, thus the Adagio in the name of the piece. There are 3 options that I could do as far as the tempo is concerned. Here they are: Option 1: Adjust the time signature to make it fit into an Allegro tempo This is one of my options, changing the time signature to make it an Allegro tempo. There is just 1 problem with that. My piece is in 3/4. If it were in 4/4, I would change it to 8/8. If it were in 2/4, I would change it to 4/8. But changing to 6/8 is going to change the meter from triple to duple. If I change it to 9/8, I would have to calculate how much a dotted eighth and a sixteenth in the original 3/4 would correspond to in 9/8. And of course, this would mean changing the name from Adagio in C major to Allegro in C major Option 2: Adjust the melody so that the syncopation is on the eighth note rather than the sixteenth note This keeps the notated tempo and time signature the same. And it makes the piece sound like it is at an Adagio tempo. But then, my already long notes such as dotted half notes are probably going to be too long. So, I don't know how well this option would work. Option 3: Leave the first theme alone and let the second theme give that Adagio feel to the piece This conserves the entirety of the rhythmic first theme as it is. To contrast the rhythmic first theme, I would have a more lyrical second theme. This second theme would feel like it is at an Adagio, subverting the Allegro expectations of the first theme. Do you have any suggestions as to what I should do for my piece to resolve this tempo disagreement? Here is the first theme:
  4. The tempo of my piece is quarter note = 65 BPM, though with all the sixteenths I am writing for the piano, it is turning out to sound more like an Allegro than an Adagio, making me consider changing the time signature to an eighth note time signature.
  5. I am writing a piece for cello and piano and I'm wondering, is there any rule of thumb as to which double stops are easy and which ones are difficult on the cello? I know that for example an octave double stop is harder on cello than on violin, but how much harder? I have no experience playing a bowed string instrument, so all I really know is this: I have tried looking up charts of possible double stops, but I rarely find them for violin, so it would probably be even rarer for cello, despite the similar commonality of the 2 instruments. So, I can't just look it up online and write down the double stops in order of easy, intermediate, difficult, not just because of the rarity of double stop charts, but also the variability in the size of the cellist's hand. On the violin, this hand size variability is a non-issue, as most double stops an octave or smaller are easy enough. Not so for the cello. So, is there a rule of thumb when it comes to writing double stops for the cello as to which ones will be easier for intervals other than thirds or sixths? Because, I have this harmonic moment here in my piece(which, by the way, is in C major) around bar 8: I know the third is easy, but what about the preceding diminished fifth? How hard is that? You see why I am wanting a rule of thumb for double stops besides thirds and sixths such as fourths, fifths, and octaves?
  6. I personally find it hard to emulate the scoring without it sounding like version 2.0 of a previously composed piece sometimes, especially as the ensemble gets larger. For some composers, this is easier than others. Mozart is quite easy for me to emulate in either solo or chamber ensemble while still being original. Beethoven though, past maybe a duet it gets hard, especially something as well known as the Beethoven's Fifth Finale. I mean, like I can write a piece in the style of Beethoven very well, but like emulating a specific piece or a specific movement and not just the composer in general, that is tricky to get the balance between emulating the piece and being original. Beethoven's Fifth is perhaps the hardest for me to emulate without me thinking: The Scherzo movement is maybe the easiest for me to emulate while still being original(small, mysterious, quiet, sudden growth in ensemble and dynamic, etc.) and the First movement and the Finale are both hard for me to reach that balance between the Beethovenian power and the originality of the melody that I composed. So, when I do reference say the First movement, I only really evoke it through the motive and maybe dynamic, but even that motive, I don't have like the bass clef respond to it motivically, otherwise, I risk too much of getting comments saying that I am borrowing from the First movement when I'm not. Speaking of the Finale of Beethoven's Fifth, I listened to a video with score several times, and I notice this happening in the brass: Melodic -> It is pretty much only the horns and trombones that get this melodic role, I haven't seen a melody for trumpets go by even after looking at a video with score several times Doubling of woodwinds -> This happens especially in the first theme with that ascending C major triad Doubling of other brass -> This happens a lot between the horns and trumpets, especially at forte and fortissimo dynamics Rhythm -> Keeping the Fate Motif in more or less its original form going throughout the piece(I see both the original form, the same form as the unison G, G, G, Eb of the first movement, and the form as it appears in the Scherzo, the same note repeated over and over in rhythm, in the horns and trumpets) Harmonic -> Throughout the piece, often octaves in the trumpets in rhythm and a 3 part harmony in the trombones on beats 1 and 3 So, do you have any advice as to how I can go about emulating the scoring of the Beethoven's Fifth Finale in the C major section of my piece without making it sound too much like the Finale of Beethoven's Fifth?
  7. I didn't think of that but harps are a great instrument for arpeggios. I will consider using the harp in this piece. That does make sense. The bassoon has a reedy but mellow tone to it's notes when in the bass register. In the tenor register, the bassoon, I think projects more at the same dynamic, getting closer to the timbre of the brass. The low register of the flute on the other hand has a quiet and weak tone up to A4. Yes, the cellos will play the upper notes tremolo and the basses will play the lower notes tremolo, giving that octave sound without the difficulty of octave leaps. I didn't think of that but yeah this bass clef melody would be good for the trombones, especially considering the forte dynamic. They have been in more of a harmonization role the entire time, so this would show their melodic capabilities. Thanks for the suggestion. I see Flutes and Oboes in thirds so commonly in orchestral writing, where the Flutes play the upper notes and the Oboes play the lower notes, that when I was thinking of which instruments to have playing in thirds before it moves to the 2 octave arpeggios in the treble clef, I was immediately thinking Flutes and Oboes Ah, the C major section where the music has escaped not just from the key of C minor but also from C minor's proximity. I bet you were thinking of the Beethoven's Fifth Finale when listening to this section and writing your reply to the post. I foreshadow this in the Eb major section where the bass turns into triplets by alternating between Eb major and E minor and then having a G major chord. But, because the whole piece has been intense in multiple different ways, I have a 1 measure rest for the entire orchestra before they jump in to the C major section. This should give the harpist enough time to change pedals to all naturals if I do decide to use the harp in this piece. Oh, those across the keyboard arpeggios. I was thinking of maybe having the double basses sustain the root note of each harmony or perhaps a 3 part divisi if I want them to play actual chords(of course, if I go with this chord option, I would want the notes of the chord quite spread out, so as to not get muddy down there). As for the arpeggios themselves, I was thinking of using a combination of a strings cascade and a woodwind cascade, where it goes from the lowest to the highest member of each. So for the strings cascade that would be Cellos to Violas to Violins. Because this isn't a violin concerto, I don't want to make it hard on the 1st violinists by writing notes past the third octave, where the violinists are pretty much going to have to use harmonics to get those 4th octave pitches regardless of whether the harmonics are written into the score or not. So the 4th octave would be only woodwinds. For the woodwind cascade, things would be similar, moving up from the Bassoons to Clarinets to Oboes to Flutes to Piccolo. Again, the 4th octave can be played on the flute, at least up to F#, but it would likely anger the flutists to see me write up to fourth octave E. So not only would the fourth octave be only woodwinds, but it would also be only the piccolo playing that high. Now, during these cascades, I would have at least 2 if not more notes played in unison by 2 instruments so that when 1 instrument drops out, it sounds like it seamlessly moves from 1 instrument to the next. And I was thinking of having the 2 cascades not start simultaneously. So the cellos would start the strings cascade first and then some time later, the bassoons would start the woodwind cascade. If I decide to use the harp, I can have it play the arpeggios as well. Also I realized I made a bit of a mistake with the dynamics at the end of the piece. I go from fortissimo to mezzo forte so that the slow arpeggios don't sound too loud. But at Bar 251, I meant to bring back not just the tempo but also the fortissimo dynamic and I didn't. Oh well, this can be corrected in the orchestral score. The Piano score doesn't have to be absolutely perfect in any circumstance but especially not when I am going to write it for orchestra.
  8. That's very similar to what I do for my piano and duet scores. @aMusicComposer I have finished the piano score to be orchestrated. I put it in the Incomplete Works section as you suggested. If you want to listen to the piano score and look at the orchestrational comments on the PDF here is the link to the thread:
  9. Your welcome. It is the first time I have ever completed a piano score version of an orchestral work. I tried doing the piano score method with my first attempt at a symphony but: 1) I got distracted easily by other composition ideas like String Quartets, Fugues, Solo works, Sonatas, etc. 2) I didn't know as much about orchestration and counterpoint then as I do know 3) I didn't really go into the motivic part of the planning, I only had a narrative to go on And so I never got past the introductory canon of the first movement of that symphony. Maybe I will eventually finish it and my symphony numbers by composition date and finishing date will not match. Or maybe I won't finish it. But I figured that writing a small 10 minute piece for orchestra from a piano score could prepare me for writing a 30-50 minute long symphony, just like how writing a symphony would prepare me for writing a concerto or an opera. Because a symphony is a lot to take on. I mean it is basically like a piano sonata, but taken to the max. Concertos and Operas are even more to take on because you have to consider Orchestra vs Soloist for concertos and Soprano vs Tenor vs Alto vs Bass and Voice vs Orchestra for operas. If I can successfully orchestrate this 10 minute long piano piece, then combining that with my knowledge of how the sonata works, I should be able to write a symphony with few problems. And if I can write a symphony, then I think I can achieve one thing that I have always dreamed of doing ever since I started composing my own works, composing a piano concerto.
  10. I have finished writing down the solo piano version of the piece that I improvised and am wanting to orchestrate. I mentioned it in the first post in this thread, both the piece and the orchestration: As I stated in that thread, it goes through 4 different emotions like this: Lamenting(Beginning C minor arpeggio and quiet melody) -> Dramatic(Loud, Beethovenian outburst) -> Hopeful(Relative major followed by modulation to parallel major) -> Joyful(C major at last, the music breaks free from C minor) It took me a bit more than a week to write down the piano score. Main reasons are distraction and just taking a break by composing another piece. The PDF of the piece has a lot of orchestrational comments relating to motives and instrumentation. There is a section where I have a solo in the bass clef and it feels like every measure has a different downbeat. This is the section: There are 2 different ways that I could express this downbeat change, consecutive time signatures and accent marks. This is what it would be if I changed the time signature consecutively: And that is just to match the downbeat with beat 1 during the solo. Wow is that a lot of consecutive time signature switching. At least it is gradually adding and subtracting beats to the bar and this excerpt is from the second slow section but still, that's a lot of time signatures in quick succession. And the sixteenths won't beam right in the 5/4 in Musescore. I have run into that issue every time I write in 5/4, that the beaming does not look right. For eighth notes, that's not much of an issue, but it gets much worse with sixteenth note beaming Whereas, if I were to use accent marks, this is where I would put the accents while keeping it in 4/4: Much simpler, since there are no time signature switches. However, would this sound like a downbeat when the full orchestra gets involved? Here is the score with the orchestrational comments and the MP3. What do you think of the piano score itself and my orchestrational comments?
  11. I have had this idea come time and again for me to write a suite about different types of weather. However, when I think of the different types of whether in musical terms, each one is different. Here is what I think of when I think of different types of weather in terms of music: Sunny: Glory of the major key, no hint of minor, Majestic sound, Moderate tempo, Graceful melody over nice sounding chords with maybe even a fugato thrown in in the middle of the piece, More likely to be a sharp key, Plagal motion Windy: Lots of melodic motion, even in the bass, Emphasis on scales and arpeggios, Minor or major, depends on the context(just a breeze or a light gust, Major, a strong gust, Minor), Tempo also depends on context Cloudy: Moderately slow tempo, Like Sunny in that it is a melody over chords with maybe a contrapuntal section, but the contrapuntal section doesn't amount to a fugato, just free counterpoint, Minor key Rainy: Slow tempo(like Adagio or slower), Lamenting, melancholic melody in a minor key, Pulse kind of like the human heart to represent raindrops falling, Exchange of bass and melody roles between hands, Never breaks completely free from the minor tonality for the entire movement Thunderstorm: The dramatic climax of everything, Diminished chords used as dominant substitute and to modulate, Loud dynamic overall, with only a few quiet sections, Chord progression in the bass representing the rumbling thunder, Chords in the right hand representing the lightning strike, Minor key(in particular, I always tend to gravitate to C minor for this, probably has to do with my Beethoven influence), Melodic chaos that somehow doesn't sound wrong, Lots of turbulent octaves in the bass, Presto tempo, Calm interlude before the next movement Snowy: Major key, More grace notes and staccato to represent the snowfall, Glistening melody to represent the beauty of the snow, More likely to be a flat key As you can see, with the exception of the Sunny and Cloudy movements, about the only parallel between movements is whether it is major or minor. 6 movements though doesn't seem like enough. That sharp to flat motion(like for example D major to Bb major) just seems inconclusive to finish with. It feels as though I need a concluding seventh movement. Does this have to be some weather phenomenon like say a rainbow to fit in with the theme of the suite being weather? Or does it just have to be like a coda to all the movements? And, how can I get these disparate movements that work perfectly well as separate pieces to form a cohesive suite when there is so much change from 1 movement to the next. As an example, take the Sunny and Windy movements. The melody goes from being majestic, like the sun, to being fast and uncertain. The bass goes from mainly chords to having an equal melodic role. The key goes from major to minor. The tempo changes. Nothing seems similar about these 2 movements. But if you look at how weather goes from sunny to stormy, the wind precedes the cloudy weather, there might be rain a few days before the storm, and then the storm hits. So, how can I make all of the movements make sense both as separate pieces and as a suite when they, for the most part aren't similar to each other and they don't share a common tonality? In other words, how can I make my suite cohesive when the individual movements aren't all that similar? It was suggested to me by someone outside this forum to have a prelude at the beginning to start the piece as well as a finale that basically functions as a coda of the entire suite.
  12. I myself often use the horns for 2 purposes, those being blending into the woodwinds and harmonizing them, and to provide punctuations that when within a quiet piece and combined with tympani, can foreshadow a sudden forte and make it seem less sudden of a change, like the crescendo of mass has made the difference in the dynamic of volume a bit less. And in orchestral scores or really any ensemble scoring larger than quartet, I always separate the dynamics into 2 types, one of which is dynamic of volume, where the force and speed of the attack is itself adjusted to be at a certain dynamic. For example if mezzo forte is what you achieve with the default attack, forte is going to be a faster and more forceful attack whereas piano is going to be a slower and less forceful attack. The second type of dynamic I think of for quintet and larger scoring is dynamic of mass. A forte of mass means most of the ensemble is playing(say 4 out of the 5 instruments in a quintet score). A piano of mass means only a small part of the ensemble is playing(say the violin and cello in a duet section of a quintet score). A crescendo of mass means that instruments are gradually being added. This often but not always coincides with a crescendo of volume. Similar things apply to the diminuendo of mass, but now instruments are gradually being dropped out. As to why I don't apply this dynamic of mass to say duet scoring, the mass change doesn't become significant enough to feel like a dynamic change regardless of actual dynamic until you get to quintets and larger ensembles. For an orchestra, you can get the illusion that it is doing a creschendo to fortissimo by having the mass gradually increase while keeping the actual dynamic at say mezzo forte. I have been told recently that trombones are not going to overpower the woodwinds and strings if I have them double and harmonize with the woodwinds. If I want a quiet brass chorale and the horns are already blending in to the woodwinds, then I use trombones and get a 3 part harmony. As for trumpets and tuba, those are perhaps my most rarely used brass instruments, especially tuba. Trumpets, I tend to reserve for the loud moments of the piece, because to me, a trumpet sounds at its best when it is playing forte or louder. Of course, a trumpet can play quietly, but I remember trying to play the trumpet once and I would always, always get a forte dynamic if not fortissimo. My mom once put in a sock to try to make the trumpet quieter and it just blew out of the trumpet, with no changes in dynamic or tone whatsoever. My trumpet had the standard length of tubing for a trumpet but super compact, so the trumpet would fit in a 10 inch wide case. And as for the tuba, I only use it when I want a large orchestra to begin with(so an orchestra with bass clarinet? More likely to use a tuba. An orchestra with only the piccolo and contrabassoon as woodwind auxilliaries? Not likely to use a tuba.) and I also reserve it for loud moments and I use it to solidify the bass provided by the cellos and double basses or as the bass line in a brass fanfare(but if the orchestra isn't that large, I will use the trombones for that bass role).
  13. Yeah, maybe that would work, because, while I might have the entire piece that I improvised written out for solo piano in a few days, the orchestration, taking the solo piano version and expanding it out to an orchestra, that is going to be what takes the majority of the time with the piece.
  14. Okay, I will upload the solo piano version, and I think I will upload both the audio and the score of the solo piano version, possibly with some text describing what I am thinking will instrumentally fit certain moments. So it will take some time for me to have it ready to upload. Where should I upload it when it is ready? In the Composers' Headquarters?
  15. I thought I would ask this because there have been several times, including right now where I thought: Currently, I am thinking about whether to write this piece I improvised on the piano for orchestra or to stick to a smaller ensemble. On the one hand, I feel more comfortable writing for a quartet than an orchestra. On the other hand, the piece I improvised does sound orchestral in nature, like it could easily be taken from piano to orchestra and then added to and tweaked until I find the perfect orchestral sound. With the orchestra, I also have to think things like: This piece that I have improvised, I'm calling it for now Escape from the Minor Trap, since I have the piece start in a minor key and it escapes that minor landscape. A minor chord does show up in the final cadential progression, the minor tonic even, but, it doesn't trap everything back in the minor key, the tonic major immediately following it surpasses the minor tonic. Like there is a glimpse of minor on the horizon and then its gone. This piece has quite a bit of emotional development in it, having all of these emotions in it: Lamenting(Beginning C minor arpeggio and quiet melody) -> Dramatic(Loud, Beethovenian outburst) -> Hopeful(Relative major followed by modulation to parallel major) -> Joyful(C major at last, the music breaks free from C minor) All those emotions and the way the piece develops from this sorrowful lament in C minor to a joyful ending in C major is part of what is swaying me towards writing it for orchestra. Anyway, there have been times where I went from piano to orchestra and there have been times where I dove straight into writing a piece for orchestra. I find that for me, it is easier to adapt a piano improvisation for orchestra or even to improvise short little motifs on the piano that I then develop in the orchestral score(which is what I'm doing for my second attempt at a symphony) than to just dive straight into writing a piece for orchestra without the piano as a starting point. Without the piano as a starting point, I get overwhelmed very fast by just deciding how to begin the piece. With motifs or an entire piece improvised on the piano, I have something to look at and listen to when I get to the point of feeling overwhelmed about what to do next in the orchestral score. What do you do for your orchestral compositions? Do you start straight away with the orchestral score and simply write the piece with no adaptation steps? Do you improvise as a soloist, either a significant portion of the piece or the motifs you want to use, write them down, and have it handy when writing the orchestral score? Do you write the entire score for a piano duet or a string quartet or some other chamber ensemble and then expand it out to the full symphony orchestra?
×
×
  • Create New...