Jump to content

Monarcheon

Reviewers
  • Content Count

    1,802
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    139

Everything posted by Monarcheon

  1. Thank you both! The huge chords come off in various different timbres depending on velocity of the strike, which is why they're awesome to use in consistent sequences.
  2. You forgot A# in your description scale, haha. That's kind of the important one. The piece is pretty cool, though you might want to consult a harpist on sharp fourths? I'm still trying to figure out pedals and stuff, so you probably know more than me. The couple parts with the dissonance between 6 and 7 were cool. I don't think you have to be conservative using Lydian-Mixolydian (how I learned to call it), and when we work in odd scales for the first time, sometimes we get so fixated on preserving the sound of the scale that we sacrifice our ideas for it. In major/minor we alter tones all the time, so you could definitely expand this a little bit, introducing some new ideas. Remember that nobody is going to praise the piece just because it's in Lydian-Mixo, so you might as well have fun with it.
  3. Cool, pretty chill stuff. Some nice moments of harmonic oddity that can be interpreted in multiple ways. If there was one thing to harp on, in fact, is that some chord changes, especially to the tonic can sound a little dorky in comparison to all the other great changes you have, especially when you try to elide the cadence so much.
  4. Serge touched on this a bit; to me, it just doesn't seem to have a ton of range from apex to nadir. It seems to stay pretty consistent. I don't think this feeling is helped by the pretty static tempo throughout either.
  5. Felt a little bit too long without significant change– when you get to the end, it sounds like a sort of end to the exposition of a sonata form or something. Like, it felt like that should have gone somewhere. I don't know, the intrigue you built a the beginning was great, but a little disappointing when it felt like that was going to be the status quo.
  6. Impressively dynamic. Couple things: A got a little tired of the rhythmic figure of the piano in the beginning. The harmonies were cool (especially the first modulation), but even a couple bars more of variation would have helped. The use of the more Eastern scale was a little bit jarring to me upon first listen. I don't know why, but the effect it had was more instant, than transformative. Overall, nice work, especially the beginning and the end.
  7. Maybe tone the percussion a little bit, especially the snare drum. Because the bass line is constant (and you already did some of this), I would make some more internal chord changes stemming from the mid-range notes (i.e. creating a G6/A chord using the float-synth, over bass).
  8. Yeah, maybe tone back the percussion a little bit. The vox effect would be better as a linear slide than an exponential one since it spans a whole step, not just a semitone. The use of the syncopated figure at the end in the piano was a nice touch in that register. I could have used something outside of i VII VI VII, sometimes, though..
  9. I don't know if it's just the fact it's a demo, but when you get to the more aggressive part, I can't really tell the intention of the harmony in relation to the melody, I hear some iii and "bIV" tritone subs in there, but I wish everything was more connected– the jumps seem a bit arbitrary.
  10. Interesting and clever use of the second inversion bIII chord in the chord. Wish it could have gone a few more places than just that, not including the perfect fourth (G, C) pedal a separate chord progression after the first build.
  11. Careful with the handling of suspensions. Sometimes you have the sus4 and the third present at the same time, which can be used for effect, but because of how sparse the writing is, makes it sound more like an interval than a chord choice.
  12. A little bit hard to follow rhythmically. Adding something else in chords or counterpoint to take away from the power chord or parallel sound might have been welcome, especially in the beginning. When thirds are used, it's a little sparse sounding due to lack of proper upper support.
  13. It's pretty good. I take a little bit of issue with the ending if not just for the bit of anti-climax I experienced. It goes a lot of places tonally, but not necessarily harmonically, except for modulation, which I think you could have had a little more fun with– the cross relation in the beginning got me excited. Either way, nice work.
  14. I'm with Quinn. After I listened the first time, I dragged the slider into various points of the piece and always heard a tonicized E-flat somewhere in the bass or melody. The orchestration is needlessly sparse, especially for some of the bigger moments.
  15. I did this "piece per day" thing for about 250 days a couple years ago. Extraordinarily difficult, so props to you. I'm going to briefly discuss 5, and the differences between interpretations of runs. When you arpeggiate, specifically the diminished one around the piece, it will be analyzed as only a couple notes actually mattering to the melody line. This is particularly true because the diminished 7th chord is precisely the number of 16th notes in a quarter note, so it just sounds like a duplication. Thus, the piece kind of just stops in time for a bar or two. The opening run is a bit more effective in keeping its melodic momentum because of smaller, less consistent intervals. This is neither saying it's good nor bad; it's just a matter of auditory interpretation.
  16. The final movement in my piano suite, intended to be a bit of a mixture of all the other movements. It's a bit needlessly dramatic, but it's the most functional of all of the movements, except for the middle section.
  17. Nice thoughts on it, @punintentional. One small nitpick. Sometimes your suspensions fall on weak beats, which used to be straight up wrong in the Renaissance era, but now, while it is fine, still carries some weird tonal qualities when prolonging the dominant or the tonic (i.e. 73).
  18. Up to you. You can always send details to me once you're ready and I can post them up.
  19. I think you had the right idea of creating a focused challenge by way of a compositional aspect gradually increasing in difficulty. And I don't think you're wrong for making it something like that either. Emotional/inspirational challenges are far more difficult to judge objectively, so it makes sense. Alternatively, you can have it be very food-challenge-y by having the challenges be very different every time, and successful incorporation/execution is key, and "taste" and "presentation" are things to always keep in mind. Like, "make a dish with duck" is the main task, but correct pairings and looks are always a part of it. (i.e. R1: Use the electric guitar, R2: chromatic canon, R3: Interval vector [021030]). <--- This is a little too restrictive, but you know what I'm going for.
  20. @Noah Brode This sounds fun! I feel like we'd need to have more than a minimum of 6 though, no? The ten you mention in your first round sounds more plausible. The way you have it setup is much more an orchestration challenge than a composition one; that is to say, the main thing that gets harder every time is sound orchestration, rather than execution of ideas. You run the risk of alienating or scaring off some people who aren't super comfortable with style emulation via orchestration (a field of study in and of itself). I really like the idea of a kind of elimination/survivor kind of long form deal. I'd be willing to participate or judge.
  21. That's a very workable fugue subject – easy to answer. There's a brief period after the full answer in the dominant called a codetta where the composer uses free counterpoint to get back to the tonic. Normally, it'll be shorter than the subject is as to not take away from its importance.
  22. Pretty nice. I'd maybe leave your arpeggiation behind for some of the new material sections, but it's whatever. Notation thing: instead of the 2 dotted eighths, it's more common to see a duplet for the hemiola.
  23. Again, work on the notation of the rhythms... using 4/4 sets certain layout expectations for the player. You have a lot of confidence in your timpani player. It's not impossible, especially with 5 timpani, but certainly harder to retune them especially near the end of the piece. Timpani scales are part of audition repertoire, but typically much slower for obvious reasons.
  24. Gorgeous work. I don't know how much people in a religious position of power know about the original reasons for stile antico, but the vast majority of the piece seemed to follow a lot of the rules. There were a couple spots where it could have been tightened up, but I'm not so nitpicky where I'd point out everything wrong, since on the whole it is quite good. For example, On page 20, system 2, m. 2, there's a leap away from a tritone interval formed between the tenor and the bass, which is a no go in the more conservative style. Parallel dissonances show up here and there, like the last page, second system, first measure, between the alto and tenor on beat 4 (the perfect 4th is considered dissonant in this time). To use a more contemporary term, your frequent use of Schenkerian voice exchange really helps the counterpoint out which is something I wish I knew helped when I was starting out in this very particular style. Complaining about this seems stupid though if being 100% accurate wasn't of interest to you. While I'd normally adopt a "composer intent doesn't really matter", I feel the same about historical particularities unless it's an exercise in said historicism. Very well done.
  25. This is a lovely little work. It's much appreciated the return to A section material isn't so overly elaborated on. I know it's kind of a Chopin thing to do, but I'm not really a huge fan of leaving melody notes to hang and dry, especially when the inner voice stuff remains pretty constant. The fact that they're done in octaves makes me want to believe there's something more important happening there than just establishing material.
×
×
  • Create New...