Miniatures

This is one of as many as I can make before I get bored with it. Hopefully 5-8.

Short, sweet, and heavily influenced by (I

Music7.pdf

Music7.mid

Music9.mid

Music9.pdf

Music10.mid

Music10.pdf

Music4.mid

Music4.pdf

3 whole miniatures in 5 days. That's some productivity for me.

Ferk -

So far my favorite is number 10. But it is difficult to sight read as written - just a warning if you show this to a pianist the first time. Reminds me of Messaien's Etudes of Rhythm and Dynamics.

It would help to define the beat in these measures - so that say in measure 1 you show the quarter note beats using ties etc just to save the performer marking up the score to show the beats (trust me he or she will write lines left and right cursing under their breath that you didn't simplify the notation). Plus for contrapuntal piano music, the pianist would rather focus on voicing the interesting lines and playing with touch and dynamics than counting quarter notes.

Similar problem with number 7 - you show the time signature as 4/4 but it really isn't -- why not dispense with the time signature and just allow the rhythmn to be a little free?

For the middle one, it is just some of your notes are squished together and there are strange shortened beams showing making it difficult to read some notes.

Finally, let the metronome be your friend - just offer a suggested tempo and add a piacere or molto rubato or just freely to indicate the feel. Note rubato will be a bit more languid than free.

Good stuff - I look forward to hearing more

Thanks :)

Ferk -

So far my favorite is number 10. But it is difficult to sight read as written - just a warning if you show this to a pianist the first time. Reminds me of Messaien's Etudes of Rhythm and Dynamics.

It would help to define the beat in these measures - so that say in measure 1 you show the quarter note beats using ties etc just to save the performer marking up the score to show the beats (trust me he or she will write lines left and right cursing under their breath that you didn't simplify the notation). Plus for contrapuntal piano music, the pianist would rather focus on voicing the interesting lines and playing with touch and dynamics than counting quarter notes.

What do you mean here? Like notate it as if it were in standard 4/4 for that measure, in order to get it under the player's fingers? My only worry is that it'll clutter the score worse, but maybe not.

I really should listen to more Messaien... I've only really looked at his Bird Songs.

Similar problem with number 7 - you show the time signature as 4/4 but it really isn't -- why not dispense with the time signature and just allow the rhythmn to be a little free?

Yeah the time sig there is a bit of a middle finger, just like the hand-crossing. Middle fingers tend to make the recipient a bit peeved though....

For the middle one, it is just some of your notes are squished together and there are strange shortened beams showing making it difficult to read some notes.

Artifacts of the program I use, sadly. I'm not happy with it at all right now, since I'm doing stuff that I normally don't and I'm running into the program's limitations.

Finally, let the metronome be your friend - just offer a suggested tempo and add a piacere or molto rubato or just freely to indicate the feel. Note rubato will be a bit more languid than free.

Had to look up "a piacere," but that's exactly how I feel this should be played... Thanks again!

Wow Ferkun, I really like your style, it is very unique. It may sound like random notes to some, but I really enjoy your music.

Out of the 3 miniatures that i heard just from here, they are all strange/weird/COOL!, but yet, they all differ from each other.

Munkey =)

I LOVE miniatures! In fact, I am in the middle of a set of 37 miniatures myself (along with bigger pieces at the same time). I enjoy the challenge of writing a complete piece, but lasting only a minute or so in time. It takes a different kind of craft, focus, and concentration to do so effectively and to not sound like an exercise.

I may print off #7 and play it myself. The MIDI sounds absolutely ridiculous and I know a real performance of this movement would sound great, so I am not letting the MIDI confuse my ear.

#9 would also sound neat with a live performer using pedals and such for effect and adjusting the length of each note. Is there a way to eliminate the stems completely? I can still see parts of them in the score here and there.

#10 is great. It gets its point across in a very short amount of time, which again is the point of a miniature.

I can't wait to hear more and I may be inspired to post some of my own set here someday...

(Sorry I couldn't get into more detail with my comments, but I don't have the time at the moment.)

I have a bit of a fetish with small piano pieces myself. I love Bartok's Bagatelles and Schoenberg's Six Little Pieces. That being said, I enjoyed all of these (with the exception of maybe 10 which I thought was alright). I have to say my favorite was Number 7. It reminded me a tad of Bartok in spots. I don't have any constructive criticism other than I felt the ending was a tad weak. I felt there should have been some deep bass staccato to end it rather than ending on in the mid-register. Your current ending just has an "unfinished" feeling to it.

Number 9 had some attractive harmonies but I also felt the whole piece was a tad mechanical. Though I'd say most of the trouble is in the MIDI with very little contrast in dynamics are tempo. I'm sure an actual performance would be fine. Also, I have to say there are a few "odd" moments. I'm not sure if I'd call it "tonal" but there are definetly moments where the harmony felt inconsistent to me. It's hard to describe exactly but I'd recomend changing a few of the chords.

Number 10... eh, was probably my least favorite. It was just a tad dull for me and I didn't feel like it had the same spark as the others. I can't explain exactly why. It just didn't speak to me in the same way. Also, that last chord once again leaves a very unfinished feeling. I dunno. These are all basically tonal (not in the traditional sense certainly but there is definetly a consonance-dissonance relationship) and it feels weird to leave them "hanging". Maybe that was the effect you were going for but to my ear, I just wanted a bit more final of an ending. Perhaps I'm just more of a traditionalist than I'd like to think. *shrug*

I may print off #7 and play it myself. The MIDI sounds absolutely ridiculous and I know a real performance of this movement would sound great, so I am not letting the MIDI confuse my ear.

If you can make a recording, that'd be nifty :) Thanks for taking a look.

... These are all basically tonal (not in the traditional sense certainly but there is definetly a consonance-dissonance relationship) and it feels weird to leave them "hanging". Maybe that was the effect you were going for but to my ear, I just wanted a bit more final of an ending. Perhaps I'm just more of a traditionalist than I'd like to think. *shrug*

That's interesting that you'd call them tonal in the sense that you did, since they're very serial. I'm actually kinda glad that they don't totally sound that way.

I get you mean about "hanging..."

Yeah, since I didn't notate anything really, other than the notes, the Midis are a bit weak but that way, but it leaves performances to be original.

Actually, in retrospect, I might make 9 even slower, since 3 minutes is still I feel not tense enough.

Thanks for the comments, guys.

Ferk - For number 10, marking the quarter note beats would not clutter the score - just be sure to stretch the width of the bar for better readability.

Well, for number 7 I'd get rid of the 4/4 anyway.

Updated with Music 4

Miniature Miniature

Music 1

Music1.mid

Music1.pdf

I like what you have but I think the texture will sound much more spare than you think it will be - some pedaling, and doubling of long low notes may help. Also I'd not indicate 16 bar rest - rather I think you could offer the pianist some choices - eg, allow the pianist to decide how long to rest w/ a bar rest, fermata and ad lib above it. Also, there are other choices to be offered to the pianist - he or she can choose the tessitura and the articulations and attacks of the notes (check Messaien's writings on that) with the option too of playing what is written.

I love though the pitches chosen and their durations - perfect! I'd be also good to offer the pianist a choice of repeating it with each variation showing the various choices of the pianist.

Well, much of this is unnotated to provide that choice: no notated feel (though I think there's a way to notate that it's free... it's earlier in the thread piu guisso or something), no dynamics, no articulations... all that is free.

What do you mean about the variations? That sounds interesting. I'm still trying to figure out how to group these.

Anyway, here's another one, leftover from last night. I really like the variety in it.

Music2

Music2.mid

Music2.pdf

Ferk -

What I mean by variations is have the pianist play the original w/ a Ped ad lib indication below the lower staff. Then, at the end add a repeat sign with ad lib above it. Asterick the ad lib with the instruction the pianist may change the attack, dynamic level, range and even mess with the texture (that is turn the individual 16th notes to polytonal chords or clusters or spread them about all over the piano's range, have the sustained notes become tremelos or repeated octaves, or arhythmic Alberti bass or a melody line) with each repetition.

The degree of freedom and control for each variation can vary - you can start by allowing a small set of articulations - eg. for the first repeat, pianist is allowed various degrees of staccatto and dynamic levels of ppp - p BUT can do what they want with the texture and tessitura, for variation 2 (2nd repeat) set specific limits on what the pianist may do with the texture - say use varying degree of tremelos and broken octaves and displacement of notes only by an octave but the articulations and dynamics are free. With later variaitons your directions can get very broad with the last repeat being entirely free. Oooh and you know what? Then after several repeats featuring various improvised variations, you go right to the next miniature!

Last, you could set a time limit to do the indeterminate number of repeats before moving onto the next miniature.

I hope this is clear.

Yeah I totally get what you're saying: sort of like "In C" with a more composed form.

I might do that for some of them, definitely. That's kind of what I was thinking to begin with. The slow one I might do differently, since it's a bit of a departure.

The only issue with changing textures (which I'd love to do in other pieces) is that the collection is all based around the same tone row, so I'd like to maintain the row as a unifying element throughout, so changing the texture might be more difficult.

This score is atrocious looking, redo it please

This score is atrocious looking, redo it please

What's so bad about them? Needs a little polishing, but they're certainly not "atrocious"....

Ah, Greg you could be more helpful and the score is not in such bad shape.

Ferk a couple of score corrections for your second Miniature recently posted when you make a final version -

1) Staffs could be a little wider apart.

2) The 4/4 tempo mark is repeated for no reason

3) Check measure 1 and 4, you didn't divide the beat into quarters.

4) Also check your meter or dispense with most of it except the 3/4 section. If you choose a meter I'd say mm1 -3 are in 3/4, mm 4 (first half) is 2/4, second half of mm 4 and all of mm5 would be 6/8, mm 6 4/4, first half of mm 7 2/4, second half of mm 7 and mm 8 would be 6/4. Then you are fine until the last measure which I'd divide into 4/4 and the sixteenth as the downbeat of a 2/8 bar. I'd go with the first option of free measures until the 3/4. My suggestion for the 17/16, I am unsure, so I'd leave it - it is a nice reflection of your musical personality.

Oh, well leave the texure idea alone then - maybe see what happens when you offer options on other facets.

Thanks, I really appreciate all the score notes. That's something I haven't been taught and certainly don't put enough time into.

This score is atrocious looking, redo it please.

What about the music?

here's my question, great work btw, how does the software program allow you to get rid of bar marks?! There's so much music i've written that doesn't use "time signatures" (kind of like Messian's Qt for end of time) and the program is very restricting..

The software that I use is Harmony Assistant from Myriad; It's not a standard.

It removes barlines by simply having a "no barline" barline, if that makes any sense. So in other words, the barline is there, it's just invisible. It's not perfect, and you'll see barlines in a few odd places, but that's what you get for a $75 program.

4) Also check your meter or dispense with most of it except the 3/4 section. If you choose a meter I'd say mm1 -3 are in 3/4, mm 4 (first half) is 2/4, second half of mm 4 and all of mm5 would be 6/8, mm 6 4/4, first half of mm 7 2/4, second half of mm 7 and mm 8 would be 6/4. Then you are fine until the last measure which I'd divide into 4/4 and the sixteenth as the downbeat of a 2/8 bar. I'd go with the first option of free measures until the 3/4. My suggestion for the 17/16, I am unsure, so I'd leave it - it is a nice reflection of your musical personality.

:pinch: When it comes to this, just leave out the time signature. It will only confuse the performer. Music doesn't need a time signature anyways.

It would be worth investing in a slightly more powerful notation programme.

This programme (Harmony Assistant) doesn't do justice to your music, which is a real shame.

Ferk - As for the merit of the music - it is evocative and compact music and meets your goals well. Bravo.

Oh, agree qith QC, invest in a better program if it has all these limits.

Last one. I think I've used this tone row too much, and I think I've got enough miniatures to constitute a whole piece.

Music6.mid

Music6.pdf