Rhapsody for Orchestra, Piano & Harp in C-sharp minor

So far, everything I've posted on YC has been months-old or even year-old material.

This was completed just last week, so hopefully it won't suck quite as much. ;)

Rhapsody for Orchestra, Piano & Harp in C-sharp minor

Thanks for checking this out. I look forward to receiving your feedback/comments/criticism.

Oh, and sorry about the crappy score...

Rhapsody for Orchestra, Piano & Harp in C-sharp minor.pdf

Hello,

Very light and clear; good orchestration and melodies. Enjoyed the "military-like" snare and the string, end cadence, scaling. Great mood swings and personality too!

Very beautiful music!

Great job!

Michael

And a wonderful and extremely dramatic and quirky piano ending!!

Bravo!

M

Thanks. :)

But when you say "piano ending", do you mean the end of the mini piano concerto in the middle of the piece, the ending harp part with a "piano" dynamic, or something else? o.O

I'm guessing you mean the orchestral galloping part? =P

oops - from piano to the ending.

So do you guys think the piano part in the middle sounds like it fits in with the "bookends"?

I'm not sure whether it's too much of a 180-degree turn and is just confusing for the listener, or whether it sounds decently integrated enough to still form a cohesive piece.

Ok. To preface this, I'm holding no punches, so this may come off as a tad bit harsh. It is not intended to be so, but to be constructive critizism.

You just love Copy and Paste, don't you? Basically, what I suffered through 13 minutes of was about say 3 minutes of material repeated countless times. Composing is about creating music, not copying and pasting material so it can be passed off as a "cohesive piece", which this is not. So lets, start from the begining, shall we?

We begin in on a Pirate's ship with an "original" melody supposedly "varied" throughout the piece hence implying the title Rhapsody. (Neither happens! Opps.) Then somehow Merlin comes and flys onto the ship and brings his Harp glissandos with him taking up huge amounts of score wasted paper when squiggly lines could have been used. Then Pachabell comes from the dead giving his little part. Angels come with their argegios and Mozart with his repeated 8ths. Then we're off to Piano Concerto land where the piano takes over the piece and says "I'm the most important one here!" No to mention it's a magical piano where impossible passages become playable! [Gasp!] Ok. More wandering on the same chord progression for about 7 minutes with no real change. Copy + Paste, Copy + Paste, then the orchestra suddenly disapears and we're right into a pop song. (!) (Did someone press the button on my iPod?!) Ah! Now we're Copy + Paste'ing again! Verbatim from the begining! Yay! Why didn't you just use a D.S. al Coda marking and save the paper! My goodness me, there's Merlin, Mozart, Pachabell, and the Angels all there. But wait! A new guy arives, it's the Romans (or Greeks, whichever you prefer). Glory be, the hero is here! Well, not really. Even he cannot save this piece since it was killed in about the 2nd minute.

And why C-Sharp? I mean, to be nice, why not just put it in C? or if you're really stubborn, at least D-flat? C'mon! And what sort of Tubist are you thinking of? Because I don't know of anyone in the world who could play what you wrote. Perhaps a Bassoon instead? That trombone was awful high too. We trombonists are lazy, especially when there is a hornist relaxing in a rest. We get very anoyed at this type of situation, of which there are many in this piece.

So there you have it. My advice, get off Finale and write a short 30 second piece by hand for Piano only. It will be mountains better than this load of "Copy + Pastes" you have here trying to pass as a composition.

I wish you good luck!

Thanks for the...erm..."creative" review. As critical as it was, I'm glad to know what you think about it.

Well, since this non-composition apparently left you with a lot of questions, I'll see if we can clarify some things.

You just love Copy and Paste, don't you? Basically, what I suffered through 13 minutes of was about say 3 minutes of material repeated countless times. Composing is about creating music, not copying and pasting material so it can be passed off as a "cohesive piece", which this is not.

You seem to have a propensity for hyperbole. Yes, I do utilize repetition, but I'm hardly the Steve Reich you make me out to be. Basically, the successive repetitions are never identical - they vary - regardless of how subtle it might be - by either orchestration or phrasing. The repeated sections generally have several minutes' distance from each other, and are identical in concept to the recapitulation of sonata form. Nonetheless, apparently you, as a listener, found the repetition too overwhelming, so that's something I'll have to take into consideration. But I'm hoping you weren't expecting one, long "orchestral cadenza". As far as I'm aware, these do not exist.

We begin in on a Pirate's ship with an "original" melody supposedly "varied" throughout the piece hence implying the title Rhapsody. (Neither happens! Opps.)

Actually, the title "rhapsody" is in reference to the contrasting sections that make up the entire piece, not some potpourri element of each individual section.

Then somehow Merlin comes and flys onto the ship and brings his Harp glissandos with him taking up huge amounts of score wasted paper when squiggly lines could have been used.

LSD much? Anyways, I'm sorry if I'm making Al Gore weep by wasting "paper", but I just converted this straight from the Finale file. I certainly didn't intend for entire pages to have only one or two measures. If it really bugs you, go write a letter to MakeMusic.

Then Pachabell comes from the dead giving his little part. Angels come with their argegios and Mozart with his repeated 8ths.

I can't exactly hear how the section you're talking about sounds like anything that came out of the Baroque or Classical era, but ok.

Then we're off to Piano Concerto land where the piano takes over the piece and says "I'm the most important one here!" No to mention it's a magical piano where impossible passages become playable! [Gasp!] Ok. More wandering on the same chord progression for about 7 minutes with no real change. Copy + Paste, Copy + Paste

The personification isn't too amusing, but I must agree that this middle section suffers from overstaying its welcome (no, not after the first five seconds). Nonetheless, hopefully you can appreciate the pre-cadenza orchestral passage that doesn't repeat ever again throughout the whole piece. Or at least be aware that it exists.

Then the orchestra suddenly disapears and we're right into a pop song. (!) (Did someone press the button on my iPod?!)

Pop song? Uh...now you're really going overboard with the hyperbole. Just because it's a little jazzy doesn't mean it's a "pop song" (I mean, aside from the fact that it's not even a song). True, it's not traditional classical music, but hell, I've yet to hear anyone imply that Rhapsody in Blue is a pop song.

Ah! Now we're Copy + Paste'ing again! Verbatim from the begining! Yay! Why didn't you just use a D.S. al Coda marking and save the paper!

Again, this section does go on for too long. It ain't verbatim from the beginning, though. Might want to double-check before you make a statement like that. Or maybe that's just more reckless hyperbole...

My goodness me, there's Merlin, Mozart, Pachabell, and the Angels all there.

Patronizing me with things you made up...? I assure you none of these four figures entered my mind while writing this.

But wait! A new guy arives, it's the Romans (or Greeks, whichever you prefer). Glory be, the hero is here! Well, not really. Even he cannot save this piece since it was killed in about the 2nd minute.

Romans? Greeks? Huh? Late-Romantic Russian fanfare, maybe, but I very much doubt that the western orchestra and musical Romanticism (or "pseudo-Romanticism", if that suits you) would have existed in classical antiquity.

Oh, right. More hyperbole. Never mind me for expecting your review to make sense.

And why C-Sharp? I mean, to be nice, why not just put it in C? or if you're really stubborn, at least D-flat? C'mon! And what sort of Tubist are you thinking of? Because I don't know of anyone in the world who could play what you wrote. Perhaps a Bassoon instead? That trombone was awful high too. We trombonists are lazy, especially when there is a hornist relaxing in a rest. We get very anoyed at this type of situation, of which there are many in this piece.

I wrote it in C-sharp because this is simply what sounded best. I assure you, I spent at least 40 minutes experimenting with different tonal areas to see what one *sounded* best, and C-sharp simply fit the entire piece most effectively. If this was in C major, the opening passage would be too low for the brass instruments, and, subconscious or not, this piece just demands to be sharped, not flatted. So there's your answer.

So there you have it. My advice, get off Finale and write a short 30 second piece by hand for Piano only. It will be mountains better than this load of "Copy + Pastes" you have here trying to pass as a composition.

Thanks for the tip. I've been contemplating doing this for a while, as a way to make the perceived quality of my music more dependent on my ability as a composer than as an arranger, and it also sounds like a "fun" idea that differs from what I usually do, so thanks for giving me that "push".

Well, I must admit your review was a little condescending, though I know better than to get upset over the internet, so I'll just thank you for giving me your honest opinion. Though, at the moment, it's greatly at odds with the feedback I've gotten from other people, so hopefully more YC'ers can voice their opinion so I can see whether this antipathy is the general consensus.

Unfortunately I'm going to have to go by what Justin pointed out.. I felt the same way as he did, maybe not as bad about it but I certainly saw many areas where you could introduce ideas. You could come back to your original theme later on in the piece, or you could keep the same theme and introduce a new key, adopt a new time signature or something. I liked your theme though, but too much repetition doesn't work for anything i guess.

^ Um, actually I do do what your third sentence suggests. You didn't notice any key changes in this piece? It modulates at least seven times...

What exactly is the "original theme" though? The "pirate" theme plays once in full at the beginning, very briefly one-third in, and once more abridged two-thirds through. It's in a different key each time...

Thanks for sharing your opinion, though. Always appreciated.

Interesting piece and certainly ambitious. I found it to be a little poppish in terms of its harmony. I also think that it could be made a little shorter, the piece drags a little from the 5-8 middle mark. Also, as some people said the variation isn't enough. Perhaps instead of just ornamentation you could develop your ideas into more dramatic climaxes because at times the piece does sound repetitious and lost. But, the orchestration was good and your melodies aren't bad. With a little work this could be even better.

Oh, and don't mind Justin Tokke, (whisper) I think he's retarded.

Matthew

There is something about this site that seems to bring out the worst in people. A lot of the members here (like Michael Witkor) will give you a honest idea of how a piece feels, not just spend the time cutting you down, which seems to be the modus operandi of many members here.

This piece has some real nice moments in it and a few that are perhaps overdone, but you seem to know that already. Few people nowadays will take the time to listen to a piece that is over 4 minutes long. It sucks that we all have such a limited attention span, but that is what the media has done to us. I still compose longer pieces and just hope for the best.

Well done

Ron

^ Hey guys, thanks for the levelheadedness (not to mention the politeness). I haven't noticed any of Justin's posts before, so I thought maybe he was just having a rough day or something. But I guess this does explain the Merlin/angels/Romans bit. o.O

I indeed do usually write fairly accessible music, which of course isn't very highly regarded in the "classical music" world. I suppose it's because I used to write inaccessible and even experimental music (never for the sake of inaccessibility, mind you), but most people just didn't like it. Most people I know just listen to what's on pop and rock radio stations, so "orchestral music" is far enough of a stretch. >_<

Nonetheless, I have more than enough "easy music" for any casual listener who would want to give my music a listen, so I think I've finally gotten that out of my system, and from now I can write music that challenges the listener, rather than appealing to their sentimentality...

[/tangent]

Anyways, yeah, I'm definitely going to stop repeating melodic patterns without enough "obvious" modification. The piano part in the middle is definitely too long (though, does it seem misplaced? The instrumentation does take a sharp turn...).

^ Um, actually I do do what your third sentence suggests. You didn't notice any key changes in this piece? It modulates at least seven times...

What exactly is the "original theme" though? The "pirate" theme plays once in full at the beginning, very briefly one-third in, and once more abridged two-thirds through. It's in a different key each time...

Thanks for sharing your opinion, though. Always appreciated.

Yes, I see the key changes. Just a personal opinion, they occur too seldom, and they are some of the changes used most frequently when modulating music (at least I do, don't know about others), full step ups and downs, and fourths up and down. There may be exceptions that I missed but thats generally what I came up with.

The original theme is the one you had in the beginning, and I know you come back to it, but it doesn't have to be too similar, you could start off with the same interval and trail off into something else, keeping the original feeling though. Sorry if that wasn't clear the first time. What software did you compose this in? If its anything compatible to my archaic finale 2006 I'll see if I can add things to this piece to show you what I mean. Only I'm leaving to the US soon so I might not have time to edit it until I come back.

I think the middle piano section is fine, if shortened a little bit. I'd like to see someone play that interval at measure 169 :P

Looks like this piece is going to yield you a lot good in the long run :)

^ Mmm, I usually try to stick to modulating to the dominant/subdominant/relative major or minor/occasionally parallel major or minor/ because all other modulations just seem kind of awkward to me. Maybe you've found ways for other modulation patterns to work effectively, but personally the changes in tonality are just too jarring to be convincing to the listener (at least that's the experience I've had).

Ah, I see what you mean about starting with the same interval and trailing off into something else. Definitely a good suggestion that definitely makes sense.

I wrote this in Finale 2008, so I don't think it'll work in Finale 2006. :/

Yeah, the piano part in the middle started out as a purely orchestral arrangement (with no piano) and basically I just did a piano reduction of that and put it in the forefront. I don't plan on this ever being performed, so playability's not too big of a priority for me.

Well...have fun in the US. Try not to get fat. :P

I actually like what you have going here, but two things:

First, it sounds like you're just throwing all your ideas in the same bucket, and then trying to sort them out. There are some really nice things here, like from min 4:00 till the shift in 4:50, then what comes after is pretty cool. I mean, those are all pretty nice ideas and I like how you did them but they simply overshadow everything you did before or after this. Specially when the build up of that section comes in 5:40. Cool stuff, but it seems like it just occurred to you and you kept on writing without really worrying where it was in relation to everything else.

The real problem is that the idea you start at minute 5 something is going on, and on, and on. By min 10 it stops being as dramatic as I think you wish it would sound by virtue of sheer repetition. You obviously noticed since the original theme shows up abruptly right after and just derails whatever you had going beforehand.

So, that's sort of clumsy, since even if you were intending to do an A-B-A form of sorts, you could've handled the transition better. Also, the ending introduces a new motive/melody contrast (though based on the harp solo sections) and it's sort of weird since it gives the impression the thing's going to continue. .... But then it just ends.

My guess is that you planned some of the structure, some of the harmony, but you just wrote it as you went along. I also notice some strain near the end, as if you just wanted to end the damn thing. Specially telling is the sudden cut at min 10 to the A/ending part. It sounds like you ran out of ideas. Stuff like this gives it a very very uneven feeling, it's like some parts are really well written and some are there just to make a point.

Also, min 8 is a tribute to Yann Tiersen or what? ;P

The second problem is basically the score and orchestration. The orchestration does sound pretty... OK, it does its job, but honestly the instruments are not really being used as well as they could be.

The brass and horn could use more characteristic/individual writing, rather than working as a group for most of the piece, same with the strings.

Also, the percussion seems sometimes only an afterthought and some parts (specially with the rhythms and so on) could've benefited from the extra oomph.

Sorry I'm using minutes instead of measures and etc but I was using the mp3 as reference because I didn't feel like looking through such huge score to find 4 or 5 measures.

In conclusion, well. This needs some polishing and it'll be great. Even it out, tend to the details, rethink some of your orchestration, work on the transitions and so on.

In the second violin, harp, and viola parts throughout a lot of the piece, you can replace the 16384th notes (or whatever they actually are) with grace notes. That would make them both readable and playable. Other than that, I don't have much to say, because I didn't get a chance to listen to it.

^ How are grace notes easier to read?

Btw, I'm not really interested in the readability or playability of this score, but rather the mp3 itself...

Just a quick note, regardless of the musical aesthetic, I suspect that you have not had much training in writing for orchestra.

I understand that your score is "a mess" (which it is... ugh :sick: ), but I just don't understand why your 1st violins don't play until so many pages later.

You need to work a bit more on your orchestral textures. I have to admit that I didn't sit through the whole piece. I found it dull. Not because it was written "in a traditional manner" or because of the harmonic langauge, but because of the over use of repetition (literal or not, it's STILL repetition).

One of the difficult things we learn as composers is good development. Obviously, you have the "easy" part down pat - you have the musical ideas. Now you need to work on the hard part: editting, developing, knowing when to drop an idea.

You say that you're not interested in how your score looks?

I take this to mean that you want to compose "by ear" therefore, rather than by developing material on the page?

If your intention is to be a composer, well, this is my opinion as a working professional, then you would be best to learn how to deal with music on the page. It's a much surer means of understanding what you are doing.

^ How are grace notes easier to read?

Grace notes are certainly not hard to read, especially when compared to rests and notes with many rhythm dots, or notes with 5+ stems (and I believe some of your notes have 10 stems), which are just confusing. The only thing that is lost in the conversion is the exact length of the note - and few performers will be able to play an exact 16,384th note anyway.