Jump to content

Luis Hernández

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Luis Hernández

  1. It's an interesting and beautiful piece. The motives repeat more or less giving coherence. It vould be much better with punctuation and dynamics, accentuation, etc...
  2. Good work and nice piece. Just some observations: I'm not very fond of repetitions. There are parts where the first part is repeated with addition of a second voice and that's OK, but before that, there is too much repetition (with no variation) for me. I know that's the style, although it's not clear what style is this: classical + romantic. Yes, there is no transitions for the A maj part. Also, I think the "cadenza andaluza" (which is beautiful) doesn't fit here very well. I can handle with all that, but one thing I often see is taking a pattern for the left hand and fix it "forever". Man, that's an "easy solution". A more than 6 min piece with that feature is quite rare to see. In the romantic period arpeggios are used for sections (usually they change with other sections) but the melody in romanticism is much more rich and ornamented. I would have written this in 12/8.
  3. Nice work. The parts are developed with taste, modifying the motives. No tiring at all. Good connection between parts.
  4. Wonderful work. Beautiful. Transitions and connections are smooth. Harmony is super rich. The textural development changes many times, perfect.
  5. I couldn't listen to it, the file doesn't work for me. ...
  6. Hi, nice and sweet melodies. The counterpoint part seems to be well done, with no dissonances in strong points. I think the countermelody in the piano is blurred because of two facts: 1. The timbre of the melody and of the bass line is the same (piano), although they are separated in register. This is not perhaps the most important, in this case. 2. The chords in the bass part are too thick. You don't need them here. Just write only a bass line with one voice. The bass in counterpoint helps with the rhythm and harmony, but you have harmony defined in the melodies. Additionally, it may improve if the bass moves in contrary motion. I would explore rising the violin part an octave in this part.
  7. Hi, I've been listening again to this piece. I understand every opinion, but sometime I feel there is a little obsessive desire of expanding and expanding. What's wrong with small pieces? Many times, I prefer to show the musical idea or ideas and that's all. Other times yes, I think some works suit for longer development. On the other hand, two sections can be as different as you want. But, the more different they are, the more elaborated transition-connection you need. In fact, you made some sort of transition in m. 17-20 introducing the triplets... Perhaps it could have been worked more extensively. When you have two parts, there is a method to connect them... Changing one item or element at a time, one by one, no matter if the transition part becomes long (it has to be interesting too). Those elements can be: texture, pitch (range), timbre (if you are in an orchestral set), dynamics, punctuation, etc... If you make it as a whole, the result is rough. I think the modulation here is a bit "confusing" because you modulate to Eb via Cm some measures befores. ... Doesn't it break the actual moment of the change?
  8. I enjoyed it very much. I like the rubato and the development....
  9. Very nice piece. It reminds me to some minimalist works.
  10. Hi, nice work (although I'm not very fond of the style). The main concert is the lack of (more counterpoint), as can be heard from m. 110 to 132 or so.
  11. Good work. Synth and electric instruments are happily integrated with the orchestra!
  12. Yes, thanks for asking. I got coronavirus. It was very serious, three weeks in a coma, two months in the hospital. Now under respirarory rehabilitation. It will take some months to recover. Take care...
  13. The counterpoint phrase sounds good.
  14. Nice piece. More than being out of tune is the fact you are using microtones.
  15. This piece is beautiful but it lacks of punctuation (clear cadences) so its structures is weak. Also, dynamics in this style are important.
  16. Good work The piano part is not very complícated. I don’t think it is bad. what i miss is a climax, an orchestral tutti with the piano.
  17. Yes, Iove it with that clean funky feeling.
  18. Very nice. Beautiful and rich harmony.
  19. Hi Quite interesting, I like the distant and dará sound of the pad at the beginning. Also, those breaks and fills with rhythm.
  20. Nice set. Colorful parts with pizzicato and counterpoint are more interesting: the magician, the emperor . Other parts are more contemplative.
  21. Beautiful. I enjoyed it very much. Nice dialogue.
  22. The music is beautiful, I like it. But sometimes the feeling is it was intended for the piano. Some pedal changes can’t be done, you have even three simultanous changes in the same pedal. Pedal marks should be complete in glissandi. Bisbigliando is for soft dynamics , not f o ff...
  23. The pedal line oF the organ was substituted for the tuba. I didn't want to make it more complex with the pedal organ.
  • Create New...