Jump to content

Monarcheon

Reviewers
  • Content Count

    2,137
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    158

Everything posted by Monarcheon

  1. It sounds lopsided... maybe the drums are a little bit off? I see what you're trying to do style-wise with that, perhaps it's a little too much, though. They also maybe were a little bit loud in comparison to the effects and the melody.
  2. Each of those double stops requires a shift to get to the next one, unless you want to stretch the last two notes, which I guess is possible, but would take an uncharacteristically long time to practice, since it spans a seventh with other notes in the middle. 16th notes under beat 80 isn't slow, you know. Mmm... kind of, but generally no. Double stops involving at least one open string adjacent to the string that a fingered note is being played will generally be okay (at moderate tempo). If they're in succession, perhaps keep them on the same two strings and the same position... Repeated double stops in the same position are also typically okay because you can settle there before moving to the next position. Slow thirds are fine, but not too many of them; same with sixths. Fourths can be more awkward. Honestly, it's very case by case and there's too many possible scenarios to list them all. Learn by doing is probably better than anything I just wrote up above.
  3. m. 19 - 46: When the melody didn't have very much to play on beats 3 and 4 of a given measure, the momentum of the piece kind of faded for me. Perhaps I'm not understanding your explanation in the introductory pages, but I would imagine some of the F major measures would be better labeled as F∆7...? I liked it when you introduced F(M7?) over E... clashing, but the common tone eased the rest of it out. Very interesting, and I enjoyed it quite a bit. Good sense of where you want you chords to go and when you want to change things up. Nice!
  4. Without a score, I'm having trouble discerning much difference, but to what I hear I think it sounds clearer...? Keep in mind that the overtone effect you have has a pitch. On your A-flat chord and E-flat7 chord, its pitch is an A natural, for example, which is not what I think you want.
  5. Nice, definitely, though I think the main chord progression might have overstayed itself welcome in the middle of the piece. I appreciate you not keeping everything in root position too. The ending is kind of out there and uncharacteristic for me... parallel fifths with a sharp 6, but not a sharp 7? Maybe I'm reading into it too deep but it seemed really weird to me.
  6. That's an awkwardly phrased question. Granted, I feel like I misspoke; mix up the inversions, I mean, so it feels like it resolves enough and isn't to continuously angsty.
  7. This piece uses the prime form {0 1 4} from the eighth movement of Schoenberg's "Pierrot Lunnaire" and puts a lot of pseudo-variations on it. It uses the same instrumentation as "Nacht" (that movement) without the Sprechstimme voice. Sometimes I think the prime form is a little too on the nose but I think blends itself well to create its own aura of darkness.
  8. I rather like it and can see what you're going for. Your inversions of your major seventh chords can result in very awkward sounding chords at first, which makes it sound wrong, when it isn't... mix it up a little bit, perhaps. Also, for your sound effects, I think you forgot that they're still based in pitch, and I can hear the unwanted dissonance they create against the tonal harmonic progression. I think you're doing a pretty okay job getting that feeling. Mozart's requiem might be a good tool for you to listen to if you need further help. It's admittedly not very "unholy" as you put it, but the cinematic quality it has along with it mostly covers for it. I just think it could be more dramatic; i.e. with bass tones in root position sometimes.
  9. 0:10 awkward counterpoint between half steps. 1:25-1:32 I think you mess around with microtones too much here. 1:50 A-flat vs. A natural 2:25 transition with a rit was awkward 3:09 crossed voices Careful with microtones. When everything else is locked in, these can sound very wrong, unless there's transpositional equivalence, which this piece does not have...
  10. The double stops in here, friend... daunting, especially in rapid succession like that. @fishyfry the piece sounds pretty okay with a martelé or detached stroke. I tried it. I believe the composer thought so too. The final measure is quite strange for the reasons fishfry pointed out. It also really stops the flow of the piece right at the end, which isn't particularly enjoyable. It's pretty good, I just think it by itself functions more like a bagatelle where development is scarce, which has its ups and downs...
  11. 1. To me, most attempts to keep it harmonically interesting were forced... they didn't really use borrowed chords or augmented chords or anything, it just kind of happened. Also, the passages where you linger on the dominant V chord went on for probably a bit too long. The melody in the beginning is very... plain; too plain without very clear variation, at least. 2. Much more polished than the first one. I guess my main problem with this ones is that any runs or trills you add don't really feel like Liszt or Chopin where is all intertwines eventually and becomes part of the structure; they feel distant. The part where you have a pedal C in the bass (along with other notes) felt naked, as well. Other than, pretty nice.
  12. Pleasant, if nothing else. A little bit bipolar, or so it sounds (perhaps due to the admittedly awkward MIDI). A lot of the big climax points seem to be very sudden the way I see and hear it. The beginning is a lot of tonic meandering which maybe could have done as a pedal tone instead of an actual harmonic progression, but it works okay, I think...
  13. 1. In 02, clearly serialism, but overall 20th century; I hear Stravinsky in here personally. 2. Do you know what a Shakuhachi is. I can see what you mean by flute and think that a shakuhachi would be a very interesting addition to something like this. 3. There's nothing wrong with those names in my opinion, but if it's supposed to be more universal, I'd start from here, honestly. I can't say I understood the 1st movement all that much in terms of the chords. Some of them felt unnecessarily atonal, but overall it fits well, I suppose. The second was cool in terms of where the tones lined up with each other, but some of the rhythms still got me scratching my head a little. Not like in a Webern way... more in a questioning way. This has the potential to be really awesome and unique. I hope you find what you're looking for soon.
  14. I'm going to be honest with you here. I felt almost nothing listening through this. With a rather unstable chord progression, you're forced to change things for completion at the very end... I hear you switching to the V chord after the VI on the latter beats of the 4th chord. Rarely did something build up to another thing. Drops and jumps in the mood were just that... drops and jumps, rather than raises and falls. It began promising with the electric guitar leading into the first loud section but after that it was flat. The novelty of the song/piece fades as soon as I realized this. Maybe that's just me. I will think of things on the basis of musical depth of analysis, rather than the execution of it, oftentimes. Could be very well worth getting another opinion.
  15. Generally, I like this more than the soliloquy. I guess my main question is the necessity of the polyrhythms, especially when they don't lead up to anything. It ends up sounding unnecessarily awkward. Other than that, the actual sound of the instrument is more authentic and flows nicer than the other as well. Nice.
  16. This is a little too unfocused for me. Voice leading doesn't always match the dynamic and visa versa in numerous locations. It sounds okay in terms of the notes but i personally didn't hear much in terms of clear direction. I disagree with Luis on the sound of the organ. The actual sound sounds muffled and a lot of the added tones in the soprano don't compliment the bass, especially with passing tones. The 5/4 section lacked character for me, and also was a contribution to the lack of focus. Everything was doing its own thing, but it wasn't counterpoint. Maybe I'm just being picky, but I'm not hit with the same kind of character I get from the famous D major O Magnum.
  17. Honestly, don't know very much about this Satie, but if it's as pleasant as you make it sound, I'll sure go have a listen. I especially love the second one... when a person uses minor major 7th chords well I can't help but be entertained.
  18. As far as I know, that looks pretty reasonable for accordion... it'd have to be a big one though. Like, somewhat uncommonly big. I'd recommend checking some out; some ones don't have a huge keyboard. Chords would be better written in tablature. It sounded nice with the exception of many enharmonic tones clashing... a very difficult thing to mitigate in counterpoint. Most of the time, when it happens, the difference is a major second, and typically doesn't resolve correctly, hence the awkward sound. That's not super common though. Otherwise it was pretty okay.
  19. I'm glad you think that! These were some of my favorites to write. I was going to post my other suite like this soon.
  20. I won't do a full review justifying everything I say, but it should give you an idea. How clear was it that the entrant followed the basis of theme in each variation? 11/20 I could hear clear hints on that front. You definitely play with the tonic Major 7th chord a lot, which is admirable, but the actual melodies seem to be a lot loosely based on the theme. Your pitch set classes start on E (eleven, if you're not familiar), down to 9, up to E, then to 0, then descends in thirds. This is not replicated very many places, at least verbatim which I would have expected a little more than what you did. Times where it should correctly go in inversion are missed out on when a motive continues to ascend. I do SEE it in other places but really doesn't FOCUS on it, which I think is paramount in a composition of this sort. How unique was each variation in comparison to both the theme and the preceding variation? 16/20 Pretty good. The last variation was much too close to the theme without it being labeled as an interlude or a Coda of some sort. I know it's not the same tempo, but you cannot disagree that when the CM7 comes in in the last variation it sounds remarkably similar to what was presented in the theme. There was to be a larger emphasis on orchestration this season. How well did the entrant write for the instruments he/she/they chose? 11/20 Piano was written for averagely. Weird chord splits and rolls, and especially inconsistent writing were things that prevented it from being regarded higher. Strings bowings were oftentimes atrocious with seemingly little attempts to make it reasonable. Note-wise it is very basic and lacks a deep understanding of the instruments capabilities in many places. How quality is the score? Are all the markings necessary for a successful performance there? Are all the variations and/or coda labeled? 3/20 It looks as though the first page had a lot of time and effort put in to making it look quality, and the rest of the piece was thrown aside. Notes, markings, slurs, and dynamics all clash in some way after that. As mentioned above, bowings and slurs are often unrealistic and unclear. Credit was given for the solo/.5/tutti section at the very end. Is the length practical (or does the piece start sounding monotonous?)? 8.5/15 The theme is very long in comparison to the first two variations. The final variation matches it, but it is honestly not a very welcome addition to the piece. As said prior, there are clear similarities in the two, but almost too much so. Altered tones are present, but don't mean much in the grand context of the piece. It was unreasonable to have so many changes in the final variation and the theme without claiming they were something else. Other slow movements can be present in pieces like this but don't mimic them over and over... that's what gets monotonous. How is the quality of the audio? 2.5/5 It's enjoyable to listen to. I could tell what was going on, but some electric snaps on the thematic notes was weird and of course the sounds were unclear in terms of voicing at times. TOTAL: 52/100
  21. Hm, this seems like a relatively basic husk with potential for a lot more. 2nd inversion chords and parallel octaves in the big part to the melody in the bass keep this from really feeling as impactful as you wanted. The somewhat Burton/Elfman style portion after that is uneven and overstays its welcome for a bit as a variation. Lagged melody in the beginning section only works for so long, otherwise it starts losing its effect which this one was on the border of for me. Could have used more in the ending. Left too quickly for me... also didn't raise any questions like I imagine thoughtful pieces should, you know? Questioning and confused are not the same emotion. i - IV can get a little tiring after a while... It does sound nice, but somewhat lacks the inner grit I personally feel is required in such a reflective piece. Fleshing it out could be an interesting task. Cheers!
  22. Overall, pretty nice. Theme: The crossed voices in the second measure are awkward, and obscure the sound of the theme, a big no no for a piece like this. Try to put style markings on the note if possible, like the pizz at measure 11. Engraving is a little messed up. A lot of shape factors collide quite often. I'm surprised you gave your theme section a "form". There was an obvious low section and a beginning and end section. This isn't wrong per se but it is odd, considering the focus should always be on the theme. Variation 1: Perhaps too jumpy. It almost feels like you're playing with multiple variations within one variation which is dubious. Why did you use octaves in measure 5, unlike the split octaves used in the measure before? Is measure 5 divisi in the strings? It'd better be. Measure 15, that's kind of a difficult chord to roll like that in the left hand. I know it's supposed to be a tied note, but an 11th in that awkward hand position isn't the most welcome. Engraving again. It's never not-important. Variation 2: Fun! Also a little jumpy, especially at the end, but it's a little bit better here because of better metric modulation. I would change the bowing in the first violin melody at the beginning (down, up, up, down, up). Bowings at 20 are also a little difficult that way. Unclear how to do the glissando at measure 23. Callback to Carnival of Animals (if it was intended) was interesting at measure 30, but could have both been notated better. Also, a better lead in could have made it a cooler moment. Engraving! Variation 3: Bowing at measure 11 is hard for the inner voices. Engraving! Some of the figures are obscured by other chords that don't really have a callback. Perhaps you leave the audience waiting a little too long for buildups and cooldowns... the gradual momentum is kind of lost. This is nice with very clear variations. The third one was very dreamy and ethereal. It has a very weirdly baroque or medieval feel to it sometimes, but knows how to transition out of it quite nicely, and changes enough to keep audiences engaged through pretty much the whole thing. If you'd like me to grade this as though if it were a competition piece (minus the number of variations of course), let me know and I'd be happy to give that to you for reference. Cheers! EDIT: I'd also like to agree with bkho in their assertion that more variations would be nice, perhaps between the second and the third, as the third is quite long.
  23. Hm. It's motivic, definitely. Does it hold itself together all the way through? Yes, but it seems like that consistency was slightly jarred, perhaps due to the slightly unstable rhythm in the recording. Your "natural" resolutions I'm going to call them, to D minor and A minor, in order, broke the flow for me. It made the piece feel sectionalized when it clearly wasn't and it seemed a waste of potential. Regardless, that was the main thing. Most of it flowed nicely. You use appoggiaturas very nicely throughout with a very clever deception in dynamics. Similarly, when things do intentionally take an atmospheric turn, a nice juxtaposition of buildup and settle down is used, but not the point where it becomes overdone. Nicely done.
  24. Fair enough; that's simply the way I was taught to analyze neotonal music of that kind. It was how we initially realized Schoenberg's analytical intent with his pieces, so we use it to justify modern works as well. Cheers!
×
×
  • Create New...