Jump to content

Quinn

Members
  • Content Count

    73
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Quinn last won the day on June 28

Quinn had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

16 Good

1 Follower

About Quinn

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    NA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Agree with Tónskáld Doing anything to Eine Kleine is likely to sound clumsy unless done with great care. You have to make it sound as if written for an orchestra rather than just strings. There's possibly a case for reinforcing the strings at the very outset (maybe a couple of other places too) but thereafter a choice need be made between strings taking the tune OR the winds. When it comes to the second subject in bar 28, only the strings can bring that off with lightness so doubling them with winds, particularly horns / tpts will thicken the texture to lose all lightness and barely contrast it with the preceding stuff. If you had composed this work yourself and wanted to bring off that tune (bar 28) you'd probably just choose strings or winds anyway. At bar 5 you could consider letting the flute carry the tune, Vn1 being silent. Bar 11 give the top note to the flute, the lower one to the oboe like you do in bar 15, a far better arrangement. If you still want the Vns playing here, let them be sustained minims (1/2 notes)no grace notes. However it all depends on the effect you want in which case who am I to comment? Have you access to a DAW and good sample library so you can try your ideas out? (Your rendering doesn't seem entirely to reflect your score.) You may have exactly what you want in which case please disregard what I've said. :)
  2. It's okay, keeps to the standard "epic" formula . The mixing needs a touch-up in parts to avoid blurr and distortion, everything fighting to get to the front. Well done.
  3. You need the freedom to compose what you want; not be slave to a DAW. Can you switch off the "key" or scale or mode? You can't modulate to new keys or even do interesting harmonic progressions without accidentals so if you want to use some of the main chromatic chords (in a key - chords that don't exist in that key) you'd be stuck. I haven't used a key signature for ages. I just draw in the piano roll notes as I see fit. May take a bit of getting used to but once you can, you're free!
  4. Quinn

    Dreamer

    ..............................................
  5. I hadn't noticed it as a tendency. The link you give is about creating an amorphous wall of sound. I don't think that necessarily relates to brass writing in an orchestral score. Slight off-beat notes on and off may help to humanise a piece as you observe. Sorry I can't help.
  6. If you mean those you can acquire on line as pdfs have a look at https://imslp.org It claims on 13 June it had 475000 scores.
  7. First movement. There's very little to be said. It's a seriously accomplished piece, a lyrical viola part that doesn't fight too hard with the orchestra possibly because the orchestra is fairly subdued much of the time. You have a knack with thematic development, all 15 1/2 minutes of it. Quiet and subtle, occasionally an interplay of melodic lines. The orchestration is brilliant as is the rendering. It might almost be live. A difficult cadenza at the end and a great build up to the closing measures. . Very well done. A pleasant listen. If this isn't a live performance I hope it becomes one soon.
  8. It shouldn’t be difficult except to keep the piece light. The harmony and vertical chordal structures are well laid out by Mr M. All orchestration need do is reinforce the sound as needed, or swap out string phrases for winds to change timbre. There’s scope for antiphonal phrases like measures 1 and 2 against 3 and 4. No worry about those “triple” stops. They’re just arpeggiated chords to get a fullness of sound on the first note. An accented down bow I'd guess giving an incisive sound. You can replicate the effect any way you want. The opening phrase would be detaché anyway but it’s up to you to interpret how Mozart would expect it to be articulated – one of the challenges. You could lay the opening chord out as double stops for all string instruments. They shouldn’t sound clunky. From m5 he wrote many double stops, light and staccato. The opening cello could play G & D together, likewise the viola, the violins unison B and G. Or swap out the string double stops or arpeggiation for winds. Could be woodwind or brass. Depending on your style that first chord alone could be reinforced followed by something lighter. I won't comment on your choice of instruments as you'll discover what you need as you progress. Good luck.
  9. Best to talk to her about what she can do. Sketch a few things up and ask her to try them and if she can't find out why. Ask her to play something advanced - if she fancies a concerto she should have a fair repertoire even if part of an ensemble. Can you write for other strings? If so, consider the difference with the bass - the extra long stretches and time (just milliseconds but even so) changing positions, string jumping, etc so don't expect quite the agility of a violinist....sure, there's a double bass Paganini-a-like out there somewhere but try whatever you write with your performer as you go along. As I understand, that's a fairly normal approach. Edit: I couldn't immediately find any double bass studies but looked up the ABRSM Grade 8 that embodies a fair repertoire. She if she can access and play any of the 2020 syllabus. She may already play some of them. https://us.abrsm.org/en/our-exams/bowed-strings-exams/double-bass-exams/double-bass-grade-8/
  10. Frankly I think it's a travesty doing this to Beethoven. If he'd wanted it for instruments other than the piano he'd have composed it for them. However, one thing your work has in common with Beethoven is that he doesn't expect his oboists to breathe or relax their embouchure! I'd question the oboe being an appropriate timbre for this work.
  11. I had to turn it off after 50 seconds. The ostinato changed but by then it had started to pall. I really don't think much can be developed from this. Best to leave it as just a short piece. There are various devices in music to bring about tension and resolution or present a string of novelties and surprises that hold listeners' interests so if you want to develop thematic material you have to learn how to do that. Study scores of composers who seem to fit in with your aims.
  12. What a damnably stupid and condescending remark. D'you think you're the only person here who went to school? You seem to overlook the number of posters here from overseas who are eloquent enough in English to communicate their message, for a start. And an intelligent one at that even if it doesn't suit your polemic. What an insult. Tell you what - go have a look at those guidelines yourself. You authored them. Read and apply them. You seem to think that you need, hell, any kind of secondary or tertiary education to practice the Arts. You don't. Have you even got a "proper" job? Stop insulting people. Stop insulting the intelligence of many who are probably a lot more intelligent than you simply because they aren't hiding behind academia. Once again, now, I'll sit out. I didn't join this outfit to watch people being insulted by someone still fresh from their high school. Dialectic won't work when it comes down to personal insult.
  13. Thank you for that, Pietro. I try to keep the harmony moving and it's been useful keeping in touch with these tonal forms. Cheers.
  14. There's often a "truth" hidden in old adages, one being that if you can't DO it (compose or perform music) then teach it. If you can't teach it become a musicologist, historian or critic. Attempting to apply science to the arts is a waste of time. For a start it can never be better than a soft science where the researcher heavily influences the outcome/conclusion (you have enough evidence of that happening in this thread). All the so-called scientist can TRY to do is tell us what isn't necessary: why music works, if it works. Over millennia, that hasn't mattered. Composers composed and performers performed (sometimes both in the same person). They evolved the material that now feeds these academicians. They deal with history, not evolving theories that predict how the future will unfold. They're historians - collectors and analysts of historical data, they're the people who come up with labels. They try to legitimise their activities by pushing into things like neuroscience but with what aim? I can't think of any. (Sure, yes, psychoacoustics is a science because it conforms to scientific methodology. It turns hypothesis into theory that results in applications said to be useful. Like we have digital audio compression based on its findings. But that's about how we receive and perceive sound - and nothing to do with why individuals prefer "types" of music. When the boffins were coming up with colour television they used our perception of colour contrast to decide how to balance the mixed RGB signals to give viewers the most pleasing experience (within the limits of available technology). That didn't come trying to understand the process of entertainment.) And, I suppose, marketeers and record companies have a far greater understanding of what's acceptable to the public based on sales figures rather than pseudo-science. As I asked: do these academic researchers facilitate anyone as a composer (in common terms, make them a better composer)? Truthful answer: No.
×
×
  • Create New...