"The Fundamental Forces of Our Universe" - Piano Suite

Before I start writing about the present work, I would like to give a sincere "Thank you!" to YC and to its members! Some of you are much older members than me, and you might remember how I got started... My first compositions (of which I'm a little ashamed of, now :blush: ), before my first Opus, were uploaded here, on this wonderful website... and I was 16-17 years old. Now I'm a 1st year student at the National University of Music from Bucharest, at composition, with one of the greatest composers/professors in the entire country - Dan Dediu. It is not an infatuation, it is just my impression about this amazing person, which has become a role model for many students!

I've just arrived from my exam at composition... The imposed pieces were: a suite, and a variational form - both for piano. The professors (7-8 in number) seemed satisfied... I hope that it will be ok... :unsure:

The suite was finished a week ago... taking me several months to complete (of course that I hadn't had the time to work every day, the vast amount of disciplines - lov'em all!!, slowed me down at composing and studying at my instruments, but I have acquired "some" knowledge, priceless knowledge...).

The musical idiom is non-gravitational (I hope that it makes sense in English) and a bit spectral... There are some indications in the score that reveals some of the "making"... It was a challenge... My first piece with a professor "watching" me... :toothygrin: It really is great, and I've learned a lot!

About the quantum physics information... I'm no expert... Not even a little bit! But I love to know as much as I can about the world we live in! And I'm really intrigued by the possibilities of the quantum world! So what I wrote is a lesson, first for me, as the composer, and for the interpret! In the score are some more clarifications!

If there are some more questions about the suite, please address them to me!

P.S. I know I'm not a people person... :( (Please! Ask my colleagues!) I really don't have the time to socialize! I would love to offer my opinion about some compositions that are here... but I'm not feeling so capable... I apologize for that... So... I do not expect you to comment on my piece, if you consider my absence in the forum offending... It is only fair, from an objective point of view!

Mp3:

I - Weak nuclear force.mp3 - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

II - Strong nuclear force.mp3 - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

III - Electromagnetic Force.mp3 - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

IV - Gravitation.mp3 - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

Score:

The Fundamental Forces of Our Universe.pdf - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

Very good piece, Thru out the piece I can see your descriptions of each movement take play very well, Good job :)

Very good piece, Thru out the piece I can see your descriptions of each movement take play very well, Good job :)

Thank you for your time and for your nice words! I can't thank you enough for taking the time writing me a comment! :happy:

Thank you!

Well you are becoming an extremely accomplished composer. I wouldn't call the style necessarily spectral - at least not the Weak Force. Rather a cross pollination of late impressionism, Bartok, Ligeti, and occasional Nancarrow. A very, very minor critique - you rely once in awhile a little heavily on motoric rhythmic patterns and scalar figures to "move" you materials along when I don't think you have to. They are wonderful in themselves I just think they aren't always convincing (and I am not sure - maybe it is too harmonically static for me???).

I enjoy how clear the form is of Weak Force. I do think your A section is stronger than your more active B material - just because stylistically i think the A section more interesting.

String Force - very good idea to use the B theme from Weak Force to generate material for the opening.

Electromagnetic Force - so far my favorite as the melodic lines and their interplay are quite beautiful - again reminiscent of late Debussy/Ligeti. The dissonant sections with the tolling bass notes have a stronger effect because of this. Good contrast of the pianos different ranges.

gravitation - Alone this works very well. As part of the group not as much as the tolling bass notes/clusters is hinted or stated throughout the work.

Anyway, very good work! I cannot wait to hear your progress in a year.

Well you are becoming an extremely accomplished composer. I wouldn't call the style necessarily spectral - at least not the Weak Force. Rather a cross pollination of late impressionism, Bartok, Ligeti, and occasional Nancarrow. A very, very minor critique - you rely once in awhile a little heavily on motoric rhythmic patterns and scalar figures to "move" you materials along when I don't think you have to. They are wonderful in themselves I just think they aren't always convincing (and I am not sure - maybe it is too harmonically static for me???).

I enjoy how clear the form is of Weak Force. I do think your A section is stronger than your more active B material - just because stylistically i think the A section more interesting.

String Force - very good idea to use the B theme from Weak Force to generate material for the opening.

Electromagnetic Force - so far my favorite as the melodic lines and their interplay are quite beautiful - again reminiscent of late Debussy/Ligeti. The dissonant sections with the tolling bass notes have a stronger effect because of this. Good contrast of the pianos different ranges.

gravitation - Alone this works very well. As part of the group not as much as the tolling bass notes/clusters is hinted or stated throughout the work.

Anyway, very good work! I cannot wait to hear your progress in a year.

:blush: Thank you so much for offering me such a detailed review!

About the spectral harmony... I haven't specified that only the 4th movement (Gravitation) has spectral "infusion"... Also, the discrepancy between the last movement and the rest ones was "premeditated" :P

Thank you again for your time, composerorganist! :happy:

Sebastian

Your style is mature and you have a great sense of timing in your music. The atmosphere and the colours in the pieces appealed to me greatly. Most of all it is good to see somebody finding new sounds in atonal music that are both adventurous and appealing to the listener. Are you a pianist yourself - there are some pretty difficult passages in this music, so I expect the composer to have knowledge of an advanced technique.

Who is playing on the recording, by the way? They're pretty good at interpreting your score.

Your style is mature and you have a great sense of timing in your music. The atmosphere and the colours in the pieces appealed to me greatly. Most of all it is good to see somebody finding new sounds in atonal music that are both adventurous and appealing to the listener. Are you a pianist yourself - there are some pretty difficult passages in this music, so I expect the composer to have knowledge of an advanced technique.

Who is playing on the recording, by the way? They're pretty good at interpreting your score.

Hi! And thank you so much for your time and for your nice words! :happy:

Unfortunately, I'm not a pianist... :( one of my greatest regrets...

Some of the "knowledge" you're talking about, was acquired through certain analyses with my professor, but also through exploration of the instrument (in this case - piano). The tempos in the suite are an ideal... I do not expect every pianist in the world to play these pieces in the specified tempo... :D One of my professors emphasized this flaw in my suite... That it is too difficult to be played in the tempos I wanted... :(

The recording is made by me, with Finale using certain VST libraries.

Again thank you for your time!

Your style is mature and you have a great sense of timing in your music.

YES. Agreed.

Really great piece, sebastian, I've been listening to it a lot since I came across it a few days ago. There are a lot of really cool rhythmic things going on, especially in the first 2 movements. I love the adrenalin and the chaotic energy of those movements in particular. Looks incredibly difficult to play. The only criticism I might have is that some bits could look a little clearer in the score, like bars 51-90 of part II (could've been written in a much slower tempo?). But whatever, that's a minor quibble, overall, it's awesome.

Woah, these are really good. My favorite of the suite was your Electromagnetic force. It's amazing that you don't play the piano, but you are able to compose for it so well. Did you write these pieces on the piano?

One of my professors emphasized this flaw in my suite... That it is too difficult to be played in the tempos I wanted...

While this is difficult, just by listening to the recording, the piece is not impossible at all. If you composed the pieces on the piano making sure it was pianistic, it's even more likely to be playable. The best way to get an idea of what is possible to play is by listening to recordings composed by difficult composers and observing their scores. This way you can get an idea of what the human is capable of. Human beings are amazing, they can play things you never thought possible. In fact, the reason why I am writing more difficult music myself is because I have listened to many, many recordings of music where the pianist demonstrates he can rip through almost anything, as long as it is somewhat pianistic. And better yet, if the music flows logically through the fingers, it doesn't matter how fast the tempo is, chances are, an experienced pianist can play through it with no problem and no sweat. What becomes hard is if the music isn't logical, and there are far too many jumps.

Have you ever checked out Ravel's piano scores? His works are much more difficult and faster than these, yet they have been played by many virtuosi. So I am not quite sure what your professor meant by saying that these are too difficult to be played at this tempo. Perhaps he was referring to student, or average pianists. In that case, yeah, forget it.

I want to comment on your last movement, Gravitation. I felt that the time signatures changed far to often, and were overly complex especially since there is no aid for rhythm in the right hand for most of the piece. You could have simplified the score and achieved the same results by using more ties, and tempo markings to indicate slowdowns, etc. For example, the start of the piece is 13/4. It's mentally draining to count 13 beats without any aid here. Instead of having this irregular time signature, which makes the pianist think too much (again, without any aid such as the right hand playing notes/beats) wouldn't it be better to have whole notes extend past 3 measures of 4/4 time? I don't think that knocking off one extra beat really be noticed in this case, and a tempo marking indicating "slow!" would have been just fine.

Anyway, besides this, your score is excellent, and you know your notation. I could learn a few things from this :)

Please tell me what piano samples you are you using?

I really like this piece, could you tell a bit about the composition methods you used?

Woah, these are really good. My favorite of the suite was your Electromagnetic force. It's amazing that you don't play the piano, but you are able to compose for it so well. Did you write these pieces on the piano?

While this is difficult, just by listening to the recording, the piece is not impossible at all. If you composed the pieces on the piano making sure it was pianistic, it's even more likely to be playable. The best way to get an idea of what is possible to play is by listening to recordings composed by difficult composers and observing their scores. This way you can get an idea of what the human is capable of. Human beings are amazing, they can play things you never thought possible. In fact, the reason why I am writing more difficult music myself is because I have listened to many, many recordings of music where the pianist demonstrates he can rip through almost anything, as long as it is somewhat pianistic. And better yet, if the music flows logically through the fingers, it doesn't matter how fast the tempo is, chances are, an experienced pianist can play through it with no problem and no sweat. What becomes hard is if the music isn't logical, and there are far too many jumps.

Have you ever checked out Ravel's piano scores? His works are much more difficult and faster than these, yet they have been played by many virtuosi. So I am not quite sure what your professor meant by saying that these are too difficult to be played at this tempo. Perhaps he was referring to student, or average pianists. In that case, yeah, forget it.

I want to comment on your last movement, Gravitation. I felt that the time signatures changed far to often, and were overly complex especially since there is no aid for rhythm in the right hand for most of the piece. You could have simplified the score and achieved the same results by using more ties, and tempo markings to indicate slowdowns, etc. For example, the start of the piece is 13/4. It's mentally draining to count 13 beats without any aid here. Instead of having this irregular time signature, which makes the pianist think too much (again, without any aid such as the right hand playing notes/beats) wouldn't it be better to have whole notes extend past 3 measures of 4/4 time? I don't think that knocking off one extra beat really be noticed in this case, and a tempo marking indicating "slow!" would have been just fine.

Anyway, besides this, your score is excellent, and you know your notation. I could learn a few things from this :)

Please tell me what piano samples you are you using?

Thank you so much Chopin for taking your time listening to my suite! :blush:

Your music is truly inspiring! I am sorry for not commenting on it, I promise I will give a try in the near future!

About your first question... I think it's not fair to compose for an instrument as sacred as piano and not doing so on it! Of course I used the piano (5 octaves keyboard actually :( ), I couldn't have done it otherwise! I hope that it is as pianistic as I tried it to be!

I've seen some of Ravel's scores... But I think, what really made me think that Human beings are amazing and that they can play things you never thought possible, were the truly difficult pieces from Ligetti's "Etudes pour piano" (starting with "Desordre" and ending with "Coloana fără sf

I really like this piece, could you tell a bit about the composition methods you used?

Hi! And thank you for your time! :happy:

It is rather difficult to explain the "methods" I used but I will try...

In the "Weak Nuclear Force" the main pillar of construction was the Fibonaccian sequence applied in the rhythmic development. The beginning was a "lightning" if you know what I mean... I didn't search it, it just came when I went to the piano... The contrast of this first structure was searched... completing the "coincidentia oppositorum" of Nicolaus Cosanus. Then I've returned to the first motif and started developing it using mostly my ear, but also some scalar archetypes (modes, like the whole tone mode modified: i.e. 1-2-2-2-2 etc.). This entire section (lets say "A") was built from the permanent preoccupation of verisimilitude, and that's available for the whole suite. The peculiar world of subatomic particles is extremely rich in inspiration! So the "method" used here, was to replicate the "escapes" of particles and the ability to transform from a particle into another. The second section starting with the percussive bass represents an irregular "dance" describing the same traits as the first part. It is a "struggle" to use the 12 tones, but it is not a purpose... The series of the "12" does appear at measure 23, as a precursor of the "B theme" built upon the same technique.

The "Strong Nuclear Force", like the previous one, serves its meaning. The very beginning - the chord of 2nd - reveals the quintessence of the piece. The permanent tendency of "keeping together". As you can see or hear, very rarely the hands are far of each other. As a rule, they are very close. The first "tremolo" section depicts the "volatile" and the struggle of holding it together. After that, the section of the 5ths, describes the mystical perspective of the nucleus as the essence of life. In the "motoric" section that follows, the main argument for the scalar structure is the vertical interval pursue (between the right and the left hand). The middle section - one of my favorites, it makes me laugh - has a rhythmic pattern that maintains the ideology of the movement, as the vertical intervals.

The main characteristic of "Electromagnetic Force" is the complementarity of the rhythm. Also the mirror harmony... The first measure was the most difficult to come up with... I had to wait for a pretty long time for this "lightning". Some of the scalar archetypes were built upon certain arguments, mostly for the audible one (for example if the whole tone mode has: 2-2-2-2-2, here I used something like this: 1-3-1-1-3).

In "Gravitational Force" the series of clusters never goes away, even when they are only virtually there. If it's a Ciaccona, the cyclicity is implied. Here, the technique of coming up with those clusters (that were "born" from the first one) is called "vitraille" - stained glass - Messiaen's technique, not mine :P. I haven't read it yet, but in his "Technique de mon langage musical", he explains it (better than me ;) ) ! The first enunciation of the clusters, represents the building blocks of the Ciaccona. The theme is there, but you can't see it, because it's "in the blocks". If in the first movement the Fibonaccian sequence was the drive of the piece, here the "stars" of mathematics - the prime numbers - are the pillars of this movement. They also appear in harmony, as overtones. There are 8 statements of the same series of 13,7,2,11,3,5,5,2,5,3,17. They are varied in different ways, reaching for clarity at page 7, the 7th statement, where the theme is "naked". At some variations, I used certain algorithms where, for example, a certain overtone disappears because the time signature of that measure carries its number.

There is a lot to talk about it... And trust me, this was short! If you need specific clarifications, you can PM me. This is all I could do for now! I hope that it will help!

Thanks again!!

Sebastian

I think it's not fair to compose for an instrument as sacred as piano and not doing so on it! Of course I used the piano (5 octaves keyboard actually ), I couldn't have done it otherwise! I hope that it is as pianistic as I tried it to be!

Don't worry too much about that. I myself am guilty of composing music for the piano far beyond the skill level of my performance abilities.

This is impossible to be played in this tempo... Maybe for a very good pianist used to this kind of music, but they are not very easy to find!

I won't take that too heart too much. This piece clearly wasn't something you intended for students to play. When writing music, you should worry about two things. Playability with the professional in mind, and what YOU want to accomplish with the piece. Keep in mind, you would want only a professional to play your pieces if you ever got to the point of having your pieces played for the public, not a student. I am sure there are plenty of professional pianists out there, but since it is very competitive they may not be known to the public.

Maybe the most difficult thing about this piece is the counting of the beats.

There is no way I can change the time signatures... They are the piece itself

I understand your thinking here, (and I admittedly didn't read your explanations before writing the review about this) but still, I am talking about this from a performance point of view. I am not a professional pianist, so maybe I am wrong, but I just think that counting the beats by memorization would be far too draining for the pianist especially since each measure is pretty much irregular, and different. Now I said "by memorization" because most professional pianists play in front of an audience by memorization, not with the sheet music in front of them. I am not sure if any pianist would be able to remember your beat structures from memory, especially a sequence such as "13,7,2,11,3,5,5,2,5,3,17". Again, I am looking at this with a "performance" in mind, as I think all music should be reviewed with a performance in mind. After all, the ultimate goal of a composer should be to get his music performed by humans in front of an audience, unless it is a movie or video game composition.

I understand your thinking here, (and I admittedly didn't read your explanations before writing the review about this) but still, I am talking about this from a performance point of view. I am not a professional pianist, so maybe I am wrong, but I just think that counting the beats by memorization would be far too draining for the pianist especially since each measure is pretty much irregular, and different.

:blush: I see your point now... I also think that memorizing the last movement by counting the beats it's a bad idea... If this was ever performed I would suggest to play (at least the last movement) with a score in front of the interpret. Even if I changed the time signatures and left the length of the clusters are they are now, it would still be a challenge for any pianist (my opinion...).

Thanks again, Chopin! Thank you for such a helpful review!!! :happy:

Phenomenal work. I must take a moment to commend your brilliant choice of vehicle for your various ideas.

You could have chosen a "picture-painting" approach, attempting to evoke the feeling (if one could presume to understand this) of each particular force. Frankly, when I began to listen, this approach was what I anticipated. However, you chose a more concrete or discrete approach--in the aural sense, I mean.

In other words, employing carefully managed blocks or units, whether in vertical or horizontal patterns, quite effectively conveyed each of the 5 realms. The "sound world" you chose demands just such an approach. Realities so esoteric, yet so pervasive, operating in subatomic and universal levels, wouldn't have been suited by a sort of allegorical impressionism.

Your peculiar (in the most positive sense) kind of sequential pointillism, if I may try to capture the idea, works perfectly. I wouldn't have it any other way. All I can say is more power to you.

Now, how about tackling the period table?

Phenomenal work. I must take a moment to commend your brilliant choice of vehicle for your various ideas.

You could have chosen a "picture-painting" approach, attempting to evoke the feeling (if one could presume to understand this) of each particular force. Frankly, when I began to listen, this approach was what I anticipated. However, you chose a more concrete or discrete approach--in the aural sense, I mean.

In other words, employing carefully managed blocks or units, whether in vertical or horizontal patterns, quite effectively conveyed each of the 5 realms. The "sound world" you chose demands just such an approach. Realities so esoteric, yet so pervasive, operating in subatomic and universal levels, wouldn't have been suited by a sort of allegorical impressionism.

Your peculiar (in the most positive sense) kind of sequential pointillism, if I may try to capture the idea, works perfectly. I wouldn't have it any other way. All I can say is more power to you.

Now, how about tackling the period table?

Period table?? :w00t: Interesting idea!

Thank you so much for your time and for your insightful review!

Sebastian

Great piece! It seems rather beyond me in analytical terms (for the time being) but I certainly like what I hear.

!

Excellent!

I have no clue how to give feedback since, imo, there is none to give from my point of view at my current stage in music xD

This seems to be a huge improvement from supernova.

50 out of 10!

!

Excellent!

I have no clue how to give feedback since, imo, there is none to give from my point of view at my current stage in music xD

This seems to be a huge improvement from supernova.

50 out of 10!

Thank you SaXoPhoNe-AlT! I'm glad that you liked them (both the Suite and Supernova). :happy:

You should check out my last orchestral work (Le Berger a la Rencontre des Ages) if you liked Supernova... It has a totally different ethos but... you might like it! :P I hope you'll enjoy listening to it if you decide to do so!

Thank you so much for your time!

Sebastian

This piece is crazy, in a good way, but still craaaazy. :P

On the plus side:

You do many things that are so neat. Playing "silent keys" to make harmonics sound, in Strong Nuclear. The quiet, chordal bits in that movement really work. The places in Gravity where you have a big dissonant chord and then "clear it up" into an octave. The "trills" in Strong Nuclear that wander around wide harmonic spaces. The "rhythmic acceleration" (notes repeated more and more rapidly) that you do in many places. The way you condition us to that cluster chord in Gravity and then break it down on page 7 (edit: the "vitraille" thing you mentioned). This piece has a lot of cool effects.... that have quite a revelatory effect on the listener actually.

On the minus side:

You might as well give the pianist a list of the notes you want, in the proper order, and let her decide when to play them, because I don't know what human can keep 4 different kinds of rhythmic schemes in their brain at the same time, like you do on page 2 of the EM Force & lots of other places. :w00t:

This piece is crazy, in a good way, but still craaaazy. :P

On the plus side:

You do many things that are so neat. Playing "silent keys" to make harmonics sound, in Strong Nuclear. The quiet, chordal bits in that movement really work. The places in Gravity where you have a big dissonant chord and then "clear it up" into an octave. The "trills" in Strong Nuclear that wander around wide harmonic spaces. The "rhythmic acceleration" (notes repeated more and more rapidly) that you do in many places. The way you condition us to that cluster chord in Gravity and then break it down on page 7 (edit: the "vitraille" thing you mentioned). This piece has a lot of cool effects.... that have quite a revelatory effect on the listener actually.

On the minus side:

You might as well give the pianist a list of the notes you want, in the proper order, and let her decide when to play them, because I don't know what human can keep 4 different kinds of rhythmic schemes in their brain at the same time, like you do on page 2 of the EM Force & lots of other places. :w00t:

Hi!

Thanks a lot for your time and for your kind words!

About the minus side, :D ... Maybe it will just remain a piece played only by computer... and not a human being... If the unbelievable happens and this piece will be interpreted, I will leave a short post with the video... :P

Thanks again!

i am your fans , so your work all i like it

and this one is good as usuall

dark

Quantum Electrodynamics is my specialty so I appreciate this stuff on two levels. I don't have much to say that all of this is quite wonderful and well written. Good job!

Quantum Electrodynamics is my specialty so I appreciate this stuff on two levels. I don't have much to say that all of this is quite wonderful and well written. Good job!

Wow! I've been waiting for someone who knows well the quantum physics to listen to this piece! I'm really glad that you like it!

Thanks a lot!

Sebastian

this is a correspondence that has taken place between me and the composer, and he expressed a desire that it be shared with everyone. I'm interested in hearing everyone's thoughts! I'm new to YC, so thank you! (Start at the bottom and work your way up, I guess)

Interesting. I too have considered saying to hell with all of it and making more demands on the listener in a world where I think people are more inclined to take what comes easily to them. I look at your piece now as an interesting exercise when the opposite is done, and I'll be sure to read everyone else's comments about what their impression as a listener is, because I believe that's what I'm really after here. Besides that, as a whole, it's an awesome concept, I'll look up your other stuff, and post it to the board to try and get some feedback! Thanks for the welcome, I'm glad to be here!

Hey!

Thank you so much for your time! I would've preferred to have this on the thread' date=' because it's a valid point and an interesting one (though not new)!

You're not the first one to criticize this aspect of my suite :happy: . You're looking for [i']mysticism[/i] in music, the sense of mystery. I do to... but not so much in this piece. And yes, it is also about different philosophies in music. This piece is an experiment. Frankly, I was sick of music that leaves room for too much interpretation. Still, if you had the impression that I might be giving the listener too much direction, and pretty much telling them what to do it remains only that: your impression. That was not my intention. But I know, that today, our society is not comfortable with too much truth. I'm a naive and an idealist. Still, the suite doesn't impose a certain view. If the listener, has some imagination, he's free to interpret whatever he wants! I too imagined the 3rd movement as a story about an electron. Is it a crime for the composer to express his own view about his work? Every listener transforms the music he hears into a feeling, an image, an object etc. I think is a bit puerile to think that giving too much descriptions, personal views, is an abolition of the most elementary aspect of music: that is to leave room for interpretation.

About your question... Yes, I think the suite depicts what it is meant to depict. And it's not about the 4 universes :) ; it's about 4 fundamental forces of our universe. There are, probably, other universes. But that is in other suite ;) , not mine.

Despite all this, I will keep in mind what you have told me! I will talk with my professor about this in more detail!

Again thanks a lot! And welcome to YC! :thumbsup:

Hey' date=' I'm new to young composers forum, and i'm looking to use it as an outlet for my pieces and ideas that i feel personally moved to write, in contrast to the dry, by-the-book compositions that my current curriulum requires me to write (sorry, 4 part chorale settings get old after a while!) That being said, I looked through the forum, and the first interesting post i saw was your forces of the universe. I looked over it, and I make the following comments and ask the following question very humbly:

i first saw the score, and new I was in for something! I was impressed by the sheer thoroughness and, as it stands out for someone like me (a 19 year old who has always known his passion for composing but is just now starting to compose), the accuracy with which you're able to express your ideas. Although not nearly as versed in the tools of composition as most, we are all music [i']listeners[/i], after all, and we don't need anyone to teach us about that.

that being said, i think you should seriously ask yourself the following question: Does the music say what you want it to say without the lengthy descriptions you've provided before and throughout the piece? That is, if one were not to have access to the information you provide the reader, would they still be able to make sense of the music? Not that they would understand that it's about the 4 universes of the music, but would the music still be coherent perceptually?

This is a macro-level consideration, so changing just one small thing in the piece would not be enough. That being said, this may just be a difference on philosophy of music; I'm critical of what might what be called musical depictions, where a composer aims to represent the sunset in music. I feel like it takes something away from the music: music's power is that it is not specific in the same way words are. There is a great deal of interpretation involved, which makes music more powerful then a book, or a painting, etc. You might be giving the listener too much direction, and pretty much telling them what to do!

Now that being said, please do not be offended. I am not looking to make you mad. In fact, I am looking for you to defend your position, as, although I said i'm critical of musical depictions, I also struggle with my position on that, because so much of what's been writtin IS musical depictions (beethoven's pastoral symp[hony, for instance)! I didn't want this to be inflammatory, so I decided to personally message you instead of posting to the forum. I really hope you care about any of this, because I just noticed this is a really long message. But I always think I learn more about composition through an interactive dialogue with fellow composers rather than in a class room setting. But really, sick piece, it rocks, I'd like to see it set for an ensemble, not just piano (which might be the answer if you find the tempos are unplayable.) Think about it! Thanks. Keep writing, i'll check out your other pieces.

Martin