Orchestral piece

Hi guys, this is one movement of an orchestral piece

EXTREME CRITICISM PLEASE. Its the most complex piece I've yet written, and so there's lots of room for mistakes things that don't make sense.

Also need advice on notation and the right rhythms.

OrchestralPiece9.mp3 - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

SCORE: OrchestralPiece9.sib - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage

why so short

but i like

First off I like the peice.

I will give you 2 quick observations on the score.

You start out by telling the cello and the bass to get louder and then softer but you didn't tell them where to start from.

The ending has the flutes going an awful long way without a breath. That is an easy fix.

Well one more thing.

In measure 18 the C in the flute would never be heard over everything else.

Still a very nice start.

Ron

I think it was rather pleasant to listen to. I can't read the score. PDF would be helpful. If you could upload a pdf score, I could comment more.

EXTREME CRITICISM PLEASE.

Really? Ok. You got it! :P

I hate it. There ya go.

Oh, you want specifics? Fine.

Do you have the capacity to cerate a legible score?

Do you have the ability to orchestrate properly?

Why do you use Sibby's templates that are wrong?

Do you know how to create titles, composers, and copyrights?

The "violin" part should be called solo.

Why did you use B# with no key signature?!??!?!

Strings are physically incapable of scaring the life out of the audience. (m. 28). Now the brass on the other hand...

The wind parts are unnecessarily complex esp. with those massive leaps.

How many of each wind are there?

Again, do you know how to orchestrate?

Do you know how to add dynamics in wind parts?

Do you know what expressions are?

Do you know what this piece actually would sound like unlike what Sibby leads you to believe.

Do you know basic chormatic accidental spelling rules?

Where's the trombones?

Where's the piccolo(s)?

Do you realize that the massive sound you want is impossible without propper brass and percussion?

Do you realize that 80% of the piece will sound like mud and the wind parts will not come through?

And, again, do you know how to orchestrate?

etc. etc. etc.

Want more "Extreme Criticism?"

Edit: Just wanted to add that if you handed this to a director of an orchestra, you would be laughed out of the hall. You really need to spend more time at the Philharmonic (or BSO in your case) if you want to write for orchestra. You will gain more knowledge from actually seeing live concerts and hearing music being played than from any book or recording.

Edit 2: I've added a PDF for those without Sibby (which is most of us).

For extreme criticism, I think Justin hit the nail on the head. Although, I'd have to say he could have been more extreme.

I'd start with something along the lines of "hey, Ex, aren't you the guy who's always trying to give other people advice on this forum? whoa! after seeing this piece, all I can say is DON'T".

So, that wasn't actually extreme, that was rude. But hey, it IS my opinion.

Please, please, please, someone tell me that THAT is not what Sibelius' output looks like? That is THE single most godawful score I have seen in the last year.

Now, on to orchestration:

Yes, you really need to start considering the orchestra as the entity it is. In a normal orchestra there are woodwinds by twos. This doesn't mean that they are playing unison, like the strings do. It means that they each have independent lines.

As was rightly pointed out, those leaps, most (though not all of them, to be fair) are physically impossible.

You need to be realistic about which orchestral section is attaining which dynamic level.

You also need to be considerably more conscientious about choosing orchestral density and texture. Composition is not all about using thematic material. It's also about secondary melodic material. This is where counterpoint comes in... yes, even in non-traditional harmony.

Important things for you to look at when working on a new piece (as I'm sure this one will quickly, hopefully, find its way into the trash bin) is building density, building and controlling texture, using orchestration to bring OUT thematic material and to support it, rather than to fight against it as you've done here.

I didn't bother listening to your piece. From the score, I saw no interest in it. But at least it was nice to see that you aren't being a [insert favourite 19th century composer]-wannabe.

Well, it's not all bad. With the exception of the flute leap from the D above the staff to the C below, the woodwind leaps are indeed playable, even by high school level players. The final bars of flute may be doable, but since you didn't indicate a tempo marking, I can't tell for sure.

The score is unforgiveably bad. If nothing else, your rhythms must be fixed.

The "scare the audience" note is unnecessary and inappropriate, and far more sadly, completely unlikely given the way you orchestrated the music at that point.

I don't know jack about orchestration so I can't comment on that aspect, so all I can say is that I enjoyed your piece. You've created a lot of novel sonorities which I found interesting to listen to. My only criticism would be a lack of development of your ideas and the piece did seem like a hotchpotch albeit a fascinating one. I particularly liked the opening 20 seconds which promised a lot.

I listened to this work about 5 times over and found it stimulating everytime.

Please, please, please, someone tell me that THAT is not what Sibelius' output looks like? That is THE single most godawful score I have seen in the last year.

It's not Qc. It's the product of a lazy composer who doesn't care what the score actually looks like. All of my scores are done on the exact same program (Sibelius 5), albeit I spend many more hours making them look like scores, not tissues with snot in them.

I find it prudent to remind Justin Tokke that it is more likely that this composer is simply inexperienced; not lazy. I find it equally prudent to remind Justin that a great deal of the great composers started out knowing very little about writing and orchestrating music. Moreover I find it extremely prudent to remind Justin that this forum to help young composers, not insult them.

I am very much aware that this particular composer asked for extreme criticism, however there is a certain way to conduct oneself when doing so. There is a difference between criticism and outright attacking the composer. Justin, you need to be more eloquent and encouraging in you analysis.

Indeed... prudent. =P

Much of the criticism is apt, though JT is showing particular malice due to his personal disliking of Exanimous, which highly immature and also somewhat disappointing.

As for the piece, the sounds are interesting though I find your use of organum arbitrary and it sort of screams "copy and paste".

You are original and despite the harsh criticisms in this thread, you have significant potential.

I would also like to add, however, that as I may be able to defend Exanimous, I cannot deny that at least part of what his critics claim is true. But, unlike them, I will tell him how reform and improve.

Exanimous, I recommend that you read Rimsky-Korsakov's Principles of Orchestration and maybe even Rameau's Treatise on Harmony (I have also heard of it referred to as Treatise on Music). I believe these will help you orchestrate to a greater and more efficient extent. I also recommend that you look over some popular scores, such as Beethoven's Symphony No. 3, 'Eroica,' or maybe even (if you are looking for a more dissonant composer) some Shostakovich or Stravinsky pieces, to see how the great composers use thematic material and develop it.

I really hope that your critics (one of which admitted that he didn't even listen to your piece) don't get you down, but rather stimulate your composing and inspire you to overcome such obstacles and become a better composer.

Justin,

I feel someone needs to tell you this, but no one i think has yet:

As much as you may like to believe, you are not a god of orchestration. In fact, I would venture to say that your orchestration is mediocre at best. The orchestration in many of your pieces is bland, tasteless, and elementary. Your "symphony" #1, although long, did not offer one instance of creative or extra-ordinary instrumental combinations/ chord stackings. There is nothing special about your orchestration skills, they are merely passable.

This being said, you have absolutely no right to put down exanimous the way you did. Maybe if you applied your "specifics" to yourself you would gain the orchestrating ability to criticize everyone elses' orchestration as you do. In my eyes, as of this moment you do not such ability and thus should hold back the overly biting comments for a later time.

Also it is clear that you are insulting exanimous for the sole purpose of boosting your own ego. Your insecurities about your own orchestration abilities cause you to insult others in hopes of improving your status in your mind. This is the epitome of "bully" behavior. The fact that you are acting as a bully on a music forum meant to help novice composers grow is a sad state of affairs. You may want to rethink your purpose in posting on these forums ...

Anyway exanimous, i found your piece to be unique and exciting. The rhythms are a bit odd and not notated well and the orchestration is quite bad as others have pointed out, but time and practice will fix all of these problems. Also take a look at the Samuel Adler orchestration textbook. Good luck!

As much as you may like to believe, you are not a god of orchestration. In fact, I would venture to say that your orchestration is mediocre at best. The orchestration in many of your pieces is bland, tasteless, and elementary. Your "symphony" #1, although long, did not offer one instance of creative or extra-ordinary instrumental combinations/ chord stackings. There is nothing special about your orchestration skills, they are merely passable.

Define creative or extra-ordinary. That was not the purpose of writing the Symphony; it accomplishes my own musical goals. Granted, the Symphony is not my best work of orchestration (or counterpoint), but it sure as heck ain't bad. I've have many people have opinions contrary to yours. It's a subjective topic with no absolutes. Besides, why must everything be "new and inventive" to be good? Why can't it just be "good music"? But I digress... If you do have this contrary opinion, then I'd venture to say you've heard very little of my orchestral music. Check it out: Justin Tokke - Music You may be surprised at what you find.

This being said, you have absolutely no right to put down exanimous the way you did. Maybe if you applied your "specifics" to yourself you would gain the orchestrating ability to criticize everyone elses' orchestration as you do. In my eyes, as of this moment you do not such ability and thus should hold back the overly biting comments for a later time.

Also it is clear that you are insulting exanimous for the sole purpose of boosting your own ego. Your insecurities about your own orchestration abilities cause you to insult others in hopes of improving your status in your mind. This is the epitome of "bully" behavior. The fact that you are acting as a bully on a music forum meant to help novice composers grow is a sad state of affairs. You may want to rethink your purpose in posting on these forums ...

And again, you don't understand the dynamics of the relationship between the two of us. If you really saw the atrocities he commits on others, then you wouldn't bad an eye about my little series of criticisms. But alas, no one bothers to know that relationship and only criticise the critic who is completely in the right. Alex is older than me and can take that kind of criticism. Did you know that? I'm not sure you did. Alex is a big boy and he is "all growed up."

I wonder if I had voiced my comments in more "eloquent" language if it would have been an issue at all. :ermm:

hey expansion more , it is a good start but it is not long enough really . and you score that i cannot read by my computar

dark@@

Thank you everyone for these criticisms! These are some of the changes I incorporated into my newer score a while ago for an orchestral reading, it was also the version I went over with my professor who then agreed with my orchestration.

I was baiting Justin partly and just wanted people to be honest overall. But I knew I would be ripped apart and wanted to see how honest people would actually get. I am extremely happy with the result.

:)

<3

It was a bit odd but I liked it. There are places where the "melody" is forced (in the beginning) but if you practise you'll write more sophisticated works and you wont have to force anything. :thumbsup:

In some places it reminden me to John Williams' - "Soundings" piece. Its odd too no leading melody its a complex piece but I like perhaps cause I know that he composed it. But if I dont know perhaps I would say that: John Williams would write better than that" Got it? There are many people who critisize your work but if Hans Zimmer or Danny Elfman or E. Morricoce wrote that perhaps they appriciate it better. Its just an idea. Anyway that midi sounding is terrible so if a real orchestra would play that it would sound better.

I liked it! ::cool:

It was a bit odd but I liked it. There are places where the "melody" is forced (in the beginning) but if you practise you'll write more sophisticated works and you wont have to force anything. :thumbsup:

In some places it reminden me to John Williams' - "Soundings" piece. Its odd too no leading melody its a complex piece but I like perhaps cause I know that he composed it. But if I dont know perhaps I would say that: John Williams would write better than that" Got it? There are many people who critisize your work but if Hans Zimmer or Danny Elfman or E. Morricoce wrote that perhaps they appriciate it better. Its just an idea. Anyway that midi sounding is terrible so if a real orchestra would play that it would sound better.

I liked it! ::cool:

Umm, no. I don't care who writes it. If it is bad, I will tell them as such. Since when do Williams, Elfman, Zimmer, or Morricone recieve this special "immune" status? Perhaps Morricone at best would deserve it because he's at least original.

Umm, no. I don't care who writes it. If it is bad, I will tell them as such. Since when do Williams, Elfman, Zimmer, or Morricone recieve this special "immune" status? Perhaps Morricone at best would deserve it because he's at least original.

I'd just like to let you know that you're in no position to criticize John Williams, especially when it comes to originality.

Carry on.

I'd just like to let you know that you're in no position to criticize John Williams, especially when it comes to originality.

Carry on.

According to who's authority? See my point?

I liked this alot, Especially in the thicker parts :D

John Williams is original Justin. He writes the most original pieces in film history so WTF???

John Williams is original Justin. He writes the most original pieces in film history so WTF???

I'm guessing you're totally not biased at all there and that is entirely fact. :hmmm:

John Williams is original Justin. He writes the most original pieces in film history so WTF???

/me looks at Norby's Avatar.

/me snickers. :laugh: