Hijklmnop

You will see why it's titled "Hijklmnop."

This piece is exceedingly conventional--absolutely straightforward harmonies, structure that is by the book, etc, not my usual style at all--and I can't understand why I've grown such an attachment to it. But I have.

Right now it's little more than a clip. I'm not sure what to do with it. Maybe I could do a separate "movement" for each segment of the alphabet, maybe giving each segment a different kind of treatment? Maybe I could just stick with Hijklmnop, and take it in a different direction after the end of this clip? Maybe I could just do even more of the same kind of thing I'm already doing? (In this latter case, right after the end of the clip you're about to listen to, I would draw everything back quite a bit, maybe going back to the monophonic line that starts the whole thing off.)

I actually kind of visualize this as a choir piece--sort of satirical, with the singers inanely repeating "Hijklmnop" over and over again as if they were the most meaningful and heartrending lyrics ever written. There would be dramatic pauses at the end of some sections, almost as if the song is finally over--and then the choir starts in with an even more ridiculous over-the-top rendition of the line. (When you hear the clip, you'll see what I mean by pointing out this possibility.)

Well anyway, suggestions, ideas, criticisms, happycisms, all are welcome. And thanks for there existing a site like this!

By the way, on my computer I play the file using my midi "square wave" voice, but I find it's often safer, when letting songs be played on others' computers, just to translate everything into the "piano" voice. I've included both below. My "square wave" voice makes the different voices quite a bit clearer there towards the end--the piano version makes it harder to make them all out--but your square wave voice may differn substantially from mine.

-Kris

(Why the alphabet? It's fer my kid. :o )

hijklmnop.mid

hijklmnop-piano.mid

It isn't clear what question you are asking. This could be developed into a longer fun piece in any of the ways you suggest. Whether it would be worth it, well, that's a good question :P - a joke madrigal might be challenging if you are into contrapuntal development.

On the playback, square waves should be identical from system to system but piano reproduction will differ. The bass at the end is very loud - I would say too loud for systems that can reproduce low bass.

Whether it would be worth it, well, that's a good question :)

Indeed! :whistling:

- a joke madrigal might be challenging if you are into contrapuntal development.

On the playback, square waves should be identical from system to system but piano reproduction will differ.

Strange... the square wave voice on my computer souds very different than it did on my other computer. The one on my current computer is definitely not a pure square wave. (I'm talking, by the way, about a voice that is called "Lead: Square Wave" in the list of voices.) It's got this punchy attack, and a tone I'm tempted to describe as more "wet" than that of a pure square wave.

The bass at the end is very loud - I would say too loud for systems that can reproduce low bass.

Thanks for pointing that out. My computer, indeed, can not play bass very well. For example, if there is a bass drum in something I write, and if there is more than one voice other than the drum track, then I basically will not be able to hear the bass drum. So this is probably why the bass is so loud--I've turned it way up in order to be able to hear it on my machine.

When others listen, are they able easily to turn the bass down as the midi file is played? I would not know how to do so myself, other than through use of WMP's equalizer function--which I've never been convinced actually does anything.

KRh