January 3, 200917 yr This is what I've been working on for my Composition class in college. I've just made an update on the 2nd movement. strtrio3a.sib strtrio3a.mid strtrio3a.pdf srttrio3mov2.sib srttrio3mov2.mid srttrio3mov2.pdf
January 6, 200917 yr A very nice somber quality here. I'm not sure exactly what you are going for but I think it has really good motion. At first I felt it was pretty stagnant but when you bring the arpeggios in it gets the piece rolling. However, the tonal language stays so similar throughout that it gets a little boring by the end. The section at the end with chord-rest-chord rest pattern comes abruptly and parts of it sound very out of place imo with the piece. You have some nice ideas, some very old in style, some much more modern, which isn't a bad quality for a piece to have. However, I don't think the styles are always married well together here. Good start though
January 6, 200917 yr The first part was very nice. I don't really see why you brought in that second part. I guess that that was to be the second theme in a sonata allegro form, but I don't think it compliments the first at all. Good work!
January 7, 200917 yr Author Thanks for the replies! :) Yeah, it's still in "sketch mode" which is why you're not hearing the flow of sections. I'm still going to reorganize the themes quite a bit. And as soon as I get my laptop set back up when I'm back at my dorm, I'll be able to post a pdf. :)
February 27, 200917 yr It seems you have three core modes and cannot decide what type of piece this is to be. It started like a dirge, evolved to a baroque passage, and finished as a minimalist tone poem. Deciding on one of these, and expanding would create some stylistic unity. Also, utilzing the voices as seperate, distinct entities is usually the first requirement for a standard trio. You have a lot of chord stacking but little linear definition. There is probably a natural feeling of needing to do this to compensate for the parsed down instrumentation, but the writing of successful trios shows that the better method is counter -intuitive. More "white space", more democratic sharing, and a decision on a form. Just my opinion, based on decades of listening.
March 1, 200917 yr Your writing for cello leaves some questions about playability. I don't know about you, but I don't know any cellists that can play intervals larger than an octave on two fingered notes, but you extend beyond that in several instances. Viola - mm 28 - there's no chance for the instrument to get into the playing position needed to hit these notes. If you could do those double stops in third position (no higher than the G), I could see it, but you're really stretching it the way you have it organized. Playing 2nds on a string instrument, as well, can be very difficult if not done as fingered note + open string. I would consider inverting those chords, as you would get the same tones, plus it wouldn't just be a blatant copy-paste of the violin. Also, any time you have more than 2 ledger lines below the staff on viola you should be in alto clef. As a violist, I'd rather change clefs every couple measures than sit and count ledger lines. Cello can also read tenor clef, so consider switching to that when you get consistently above either the F or G above the staff. Also, a lot of this piece seems very "square". You have tutti downbeats in almost every measure, which can be a big no-no. It gives an overly metrical feeling, and the mood you're trying to create goes against that. In the fast section, if you're going to use repeated notes like you do, you need some rhythmic variation. Overall, the piece isn't bad, but I think it suffers from a bad case of too much material relative to the piece. It's written almost like an over-extended overture. I think you should focus on a couple rhythmic motives and a couple of melodic/harmonic motives and develop them throughout the piece. The slow sections should be more contrapuntal and the fast sections should be more lyrical, but based on the same material. This will give the piece more cohesion.
March 2, 200917 yr Author Yeah, I tend to go for that epic film-score kind of sound a lot, lol. And thanks for the info about playability. I've never played a string instrument before, so it's hard to keep up with what can and can't be done sometimes, if you know what I mean.
July 11, 200917 yr Author UPDATE! :w00t: Ok, so I've made some major changes and additions since my last update. The piece is almost finished, lol. Just to let you know, in the .sib and the .pdf, there is a graphics glitch in measure 85. How it got there, I have no clue... lol. Any feedback/suggestions welcomed. :)
July 15, 200917 yr Well! Long time no see! Honesty is important, so I'll be as honest as I can. Your tonal language to start is very film-inspired, I can tell! But even in film scores, you generally find an idea or motive that unites the material... and I couldn't find a trace of similarity between your opening and that choralish section in 5/4. Speaking of which, I really don't see the reason for 5/4 since you avoid an emphasis on the first beat of the measure a lot during this section. And already within this section, you have some incredibly difficult viola stoppings and hard cello stops. As a listener, I appreciate the effort put into the rhythmic variety, but I feel that they don't have as legitimate a purpose as I would have liked for them to have. The section starting at 36 would be... very difficult. And especially if you have double stops moving so quickly... it'd just be too much almost. With the entrance of that next section, it seemed like you'd have some idea that you'd work with in this context.. but I guess you decided not to. Alright, this new section is generally playable. But... I don't understand why you are using such weird harmonic movement in a string trio of all things... Honestly, it just seems a bit juvenile to me. Alright, now this chorale section is generally... not playable. A lot of the cello lines are impossible. Measure 83, for example, I see what you were doing, but at that tempo and with such a bowing, it would be extremely difficult to move from the A (open string) to the G (4th finger, 1st position). Honestly, I feel like the only thing uniting the music so far is the tonal language... which I regret to tell you, is juvenile in my opinion. Film music is generally incidental... so different sections make sense with what we see on screen... but these sections don't seem to be connected at all. Honestly, I believe that if this was an exercise in understanding what makes those cliched film effects work, then you've succeeded. But I don't think that you should qualify this as an example of your work. That's just me divulging my honest opinion, though. I'm sorry for the negativity, but keep composing! :)
July 15, 200917 yr Author Thanks for the advice, Mael. :) I know that playability is definitely an issue in areas of the piece. So I'll be working on that for sure. As for the cliched film sound... well, I REALLY like the cliched film sound. :toothygrin: Which is why I used it as an inspiration for this piece. I know that not everyone will like it, but I'm all for a sappy romantic theme here, and an epic yet cliche sound there... lol, it's just me. XD
July 15, 200917 yr Thanks for the advice, Mael. :)I know that playability is definitely an issue in areas of the piece. So I'll be working on that for sure. As for the cliched film sound... well, I REALLY like the cliched film sound. :toothygrin: Which is why I used it as an inspiration for this piece. I know that not everyone will like it, but I'm all for a sappy romantic theme here, and an epic yet cliche sound there... lol, it's just me. XD Sure, I believe you! But... you really don't have anything in here that screams "romantic film score" or "neo-romantic film score" .. It mostly sounds like a kid trying to imitate that film sound and not getting very far. Perhaps you should study some actual film scores? That's the best advice I think I can give.
July 18, 200917 yr Author I think one thing that might be causing that is the fact that I'm only working with three instruments. But anyway, which parts sound childish? I'll admit, sometimes I feel like the faster sections come across as a bit... cheesy. lol But I do like the way my slower sections sound. :)
July 23, 200917 yr Author So what parts should I change? Aside for playability issues. I mean, just in making the music better in general. lol
August 29, 200917 yr Author Ok, I have updated the trio. The 1st movement is almost finished. I've also uploaded the beginning of the 2nd movement. :)
October 24, 200916 yr It was enjoyable. You probably can consider harmonics for the high notes. You have a lot of ideas but I agree with the comment about better organisation (Structure). Maybe I can say it in this way, you have some good content here, but you need to package it better. Thank you for sharing.
