Fruna's Curse: Prelude and First Scene (2)

In this scene, the Sprits of the Elements (Eva, Thelma, Seastro, and Brun) are playing and mock the gods while they are away. The gods arrive and then they leave. This scene was sort of planned as just a lighthearted scene and doesn't have anything to do with the plot other than introducing the crucial characters of the Spirits of the Elements, who will play a huge part in the trilogy I'm planning on making with this opera.Fruna's Curse: Overture and First Scene (2)Fruna's Curse: Overture and First Scene (2)

Fruna's Curse: Prelude and First Scene (2)

Nice piece, I like it!!

I've never critiqued an opera before, I'm not sure what to say... I like it though.

Keep in mind the use of foreground/midground/background, because I think at some points the instruments carrying the melody gets drowned out by a group supposed to be in the mid/background. Remember, the ear tends to follow motion. But this was only occasionally, not a big issue to fret over.

The voice parts were nice. It would be interesting to see the whole of the completed opera.

Keep at it! I'm looking forward to seeing the rest of it!

-MF

Thank you. I know that for this one I deffinitly could do some work on it. I'm right in the middle of the second scene right now. Maybe I'll back and edit it later. Might you tell me a place where that occures though, so I have a better understanding where that is?

I am unable to open your sound file.

Hence I opened the score and listened to it in Finale. First of all: naming a piece. You call 1-52 an ouverture. An ouverture is a musical form, quite frequently introducing a musical piece, which is wirtten in a clearly sonata form (using an A and B theme (male and female theme) which is been developped and repeated to say the least). I am unable to find this in your score. The only thing I could find was the opening theme which is repeated very often. (Fis, D - .... )

Secondly, why not use a string chord division instead of putting a simple D in the vcli and CB? Mahler had some brilliant writings in his scores. They would be of help.

Thirdly, there is no clear build up of the orchestra. You use a very powerful orchestra here, whereas your prologue was with only few instruments. Nothing wrong with that but the orchestration - I am sorry to say - is very poor.

Fourthly: you use Sopranos, altos, contra tenors, tenors and basses for your choir if I am right. Why Contra tenors is my first question when the basses do no do anything until 268? Your scoring for choir is very - do not know the english word - similar, all the voices sound the same (215) can work but you seem to make use of it constantly, not taking into accound laws of harmony.

Fifthly, my other remarks in the other posting are also valid here.

Although I do like the idea of your work, I guess you are way too young to undertake such an enterprise (or at least not yet skilled enough).. Try writing for smaller ensembles first, before you attack such a hugue work, an opera, for such a hugue setting. Although... I liked the idea behind it and although your work really shows you have talent.

Wolfgang Sachs

Okay, Wolfgang, first off, the Contertenor is used because... well, I thought it would fit the character. Secondly the bass comes in so late because that's where he comes in in the scene. I can't very well add him in earlier if that's not where he enters.

Also, not all overtures are quite so strict. Listen to Wagner's overture to Das Rhiengold. It's consistent and builds up. The rules of music have changed a lot, and not so strict when it comes to form. My overture introduces the opera and opens the scene, exactly as it's supposed to, and thus fits its purpose

The reason I use the full orchestra here is because I didn't want to overpower such a simple prologue. Thus I made it for ensemble. I've already written enough ensembles already, so how am I to gain experience for orchestra without trying it. Just a thought. I'm not trying to sound rude or unreceptive. I take your criticism to heart and your praises as well, but I feel that I must point this things out.

Also, Wolfgang, the scoring is basically a standard orchestra. How is it poor if I'm using all of the instruments required for an orchestra?

And it's not a choir, those are the individual characters... or didn't you notice?

Okay, Wolfgang, first off, the Contertenor is used because... well, I thought it would fit the character. Secondly the bass comes in so late because that's where he comes in in the scene. I can't very well add him in earlier if that's not where he enters.

Also, not all overtures are quite so strict. Listen to Wagner's overture to Das Rhiengold. It's consistent and builds up. The rules of music have changed a lot, and not so strict when it comes to form. My overture introduces the opera and opens the scene, exactly as it's supposed to, and thus fits its purpose

The reason I use the full orchestra here is because I didn't want to overpower such a simple prologue. Thus I made it for ensemble. I've already written enough ensembles already, so how am I to gain experience for orchestra without trying it. Just a thought. I'm not trying to sound rude or unreceptive. I take your criticism to heart and your praises as well, but I feel that I must point this things out.

OK first of all, an ouverture is an ouverture, it is as simple as that. Music rules may have changed a lot, last time I checked an ouverture still had to obey a certain amount of rules. You refer to Wagner. You may perhaps be interested to find his scores here http://imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/0/06/IMSLP33405-PMLP21241-Wagner_-_Das_Rheingold__Scene_1_.pdf. I have selected for you the opening of Das Rheingold. He does not call it a Ouverture, but a Vorspiel, which is a prelude, just because ... it is a prelude, not an ouverture. Music may have changed, yet certain simple elements have remained the same.

Secondly, from your score it is not clear that we are dealing here with simple characters. It is said, Soprano, Counter Tenor, Alto, .... Perhaps it would have been useful to put the role they perfom in front of the staff, instead of having the voice name kept there, that would have made it clearer. In this case, I withdraw my point of the bass coming in late. I understand now better what you wanted to do.

Thirdly, I have never said you orchestra was poor. You indeed use a full orchestra, what I said, or intended to say, is that your orchestration is poor, not the orchestra, how could it be if you use a full orchestra, yet ... your orchestration does not show an adequate use of a full orchestra, hence my remark. I like the fact that you TRY to write for a full orchestra, yet your basis is not developped enough, hence my suggestion to write for a small ensemble, you will benefit from it. Furthermore, look at your music again and try to modulate; this way your music stays flat.

Furhtermore to my point of orchestration: look at Wagner's Vorspiel of das Rheingold... you will see he uses instruments of different sections playing the same notes to give depth to his music.

Did not want to sound rude, but just wanted to point out some simple facts.

Kind regards

Thank you for clearing up your meaning of 'orchestration being poor." True, the first scene, as I've said previously, needs work. Although I don't think a total overhaul of the score is in need. It definitly has promise, from other critiques I've recieved on it, of being a wonderful scene, but a couple of alterations may do it good.

I think I might have been confusing a prelude with an overture. I thought that they were both the same. Sorry for the inconvieniance. For that, I'm sorry to have snapped at you.

Might you tell me what you mean exactly by 'adequate use of a full orchestra". It seems that if you use the instruments and there's notes on the paper that should be 'adequate use'. Or is there some magical formula to which I have to use to make 'adequate use' of it?

Also, I don't see the need to modulate constantly, it's a major headach on the composer, the conductor, and the musician/vocalist if you're changing key every five bars. (Not literally, of course.) If it works in the key it's set in, why change it? Furthermore, if I do modulate more than I already have then the sound that I had intended for will be lost... and that will ruin the work, in my opinion.

And further more, I still don't see the point in writing for small ensembles if it doesn't give you the same experience as writing for full orchestra. It just isn't the same. Also, I'd like to say, I'm sorry if I'm sounding rude or just down right unresponsive to your opinions. It was never my intention at all.

Hi Aaron,

Sorry for not having replied earlier, but there is also school to think about. I read your latest posting and would like to answer the following to you regarding your question:

1°: modulation: modulation is not the night mare of every conductor of player. It makes music much more interesting, it can give you emotions and feelings, it can give you contrast. It is true that you do not have to chance just for the sake of changing key, it it keep your ear alive, and prevent you from falling asleep/

2° You mark Horns 1 & 3 yet you only have on horn line? Where is there an indication for horns 2 & 4 or are they supposed to keep quiet until the piece is over? you should use 2 horn staffs, one for horns 1 & 2 and one for 3 & 4.

3° you use one trumpet only according to the indication of the staff, according to the staffs in your score. One trumpet needs two horns, so you could use two trumpets or the standard number of trumpets in a score

4° You open your piece with a D in the cellos and cb. Why not try to obtain more contrast. Div you cellos and cb and also use the base tone; add the fag and contra fag to obtain sound effects. check the scores of Wagner which you mentioned, also check ravel or Mahler for that case and look what they do with a chord and how it sounds

5° You open your score with one # (do not know the name in english). This means that your score is supposed to be in G major, yet you open your score as it if written in D major (horn part) and also end in with a D. Hence, your score is either in D and then you need two # # or in G, but then you have to change some things. This way, using a traditional outline for your music, iti s not clear. You are right in stating that music has changed thoughout the years (it would be a pittyful thing if it had not done so), yet some rules and regulations are to be observed, nevertheless, unless you obviously write in a different style (modernism) which is not the case with your score, which has a classic built up and uses classicaly based harmony.

6° Bars 21 - 40 are repeated twice with a game of question and answer in it. It strikes me that both are scores in exactly the same way, no change in instrumentation, no change in key tonality, no change in ... nothing. Why not use this formula of question and answer - which is good by the way - but also use it in your instrumentation: let the instruments give the answer by putting the answer not in the same instruments as which you use for the question (pic, fl and strings) why not use ob + cl for the answer together with the Vla whereas you could use the VLNI for the question together with teh Pic and Fl as you did to give you but one example. The second time you pose the question (27-32) you could use eg horns and Clarinettes e.g. and have the answer played by different instruments. Why not change the second time to a minor key to obtain some diversity (is not the right word, some .... as in a landscape, not everything is flat, you have heights and lows, small climbs and small valleys... (hope you understand what I mean).

7° IT strikes me that you use a div for the flutes, but it is never mentioned where the flutes play unisono. Is there bars 23 - 24 (i think) but one flute which plays or are it two flutes who play the same notes?

8° you use an orchestra of about 80 persons (if I count correctlly) yet... of these 80 persons there are constantly but a few persons playings, you very seldom have full sections, and for some other reason the copper players are not allowed to play alone, but the entire section either serves as a support for the winds or for the strings.

THere are other points I could point out, but this is enough for the moment I think. It is a pitty that you say that it is good enough because people say they like it. I like macdonald as well, yet it is not good for your health appareantly. You have talent, but it still needs a lot more skill and training. And I really would insist on modulation... I do not know of any composer who does not modulate; it is as basic for writing music as is shitting, eating, drinking, sleeping, loving for being a healthy human being.

Wolfgang

Thank you for your constant bashing of my piece, I respect that you've taken this amount of time finding mistakes and faults in my work. I also applaud your tenacity, because it's obvious you just want to see me change the whole thing.

Well, I've got some news, one of my other friends says that it isn't going to have a good chanced at being performed because it's not a "contemporary" style. So you two have a lot in common. You both think I should redo the score. What are your thoughts on this? She claims that the modern audiance won't be receptive to it because it doesn't echo the noisy, unformed, and sloppy ways of contemporary classical music. So, what do you think. I bet I already know what it is, but might as well ask.

Sorry for my irritability. I'm not at my happiest at the moment, finding out this late that nothing I'm doing is right.

Thank you for your constant bashing of my piece, I respect that you've taken this amount of time finding mistakes and faults in my work. I also applaud your tenacity, because it's obvious you just want to see me change the whole thing.

Well, I've got some news, one of my other friends says that it isn't going to have a good chanced at being performed because it's not a "contemporary" style. So you two have a lot in common. You both think I should redo the score. What are your thoughts on this? She claims that the modern audiance won't be receptive to it because it doesn't echo the noisy, unformed, and sloppy ways of contemporary classical music. So, what do you think. I bet I already know what it is, but might as well ask.

Aaron,

Firstly, I am very much upset by what you right here... It is you who asked me last time what I thought was wrong with your orchestration. In my opinion I thought you cared and wanted to know what I thought, hence I gave my comments. Now, I get the opinion, - NO ! I know - you resent my comments, - comments YOU asked for - thinking that you it best how things should be done. Well, if this is the case, why did you take the trouble of asking me what was wrong, what you could improve. Why then take the trouble of posting your scores here seeking for comments if the only thing you want is to get yourself convinced of your own right.

I have never said I wanted you to redo the entire score. I encouraged you in your concept, which I find really good, I encourage you in your writing because you show talent, which however need work.

Anyhow, ... I was asked to participate in this forum because the piece I uploaded as a first one really showed that I had skill. This is what the posting said. I hesitated for a long time, but in the end I persuaded myself to do so.

I will not bother you any more commenting your scores, if this is the reaction I get. I wish you good look and can only hope you continue the way you write, this way your music will never be performed. Your friend is right, but not solely for the reasons she gave, but that is a different story.

Good luck

Wolfgang Sachs

I'm sorry, I said that I was already irritated about what she said and I don't normally type like this. I'm usually very receptive, it's just I've not been having the best of luck lately. For that I apologize. You're comments make more sense to me than what my friend keeps telling me. If you'd like to tell my why you'd agree with her, though, I'd like to know. (Just remember, I like to debate by nature, so this is nothing against you.)

Although I am sort of insulted by your comments there toward the end of your message. We're supposed to be here to encourage each other and aid in eachother's musical growth and to wish me the worst of luck my saying that you hope I never get performed is an insult of the highest authority in my opinion.

Don't listen to what anyone says. If they don't care what you think than you should not care what they think. This gives you more reason to compose what you want to compose. I'm writing a symphony and this is far beyond my compositional level. Keep Going.

Wolfgang absolutely has no right to say all these things. I don't that he has ever written an Opera. If he thinks you don't know what you're doing he's completely putting himself in a whole hotbed of irony.

Wolfgang absolutely has no right to say all these things. I don't that he has ever written an Opera. If he thinks you don't know what you're doing he's completely putting himself in a whole hotbed of irony. <img src="http://network.youngcomposers.com/elgg/ipb/public/style_emoticons/default/angry.gif" alt=":angry:" />

Before stating what you write Jared, you should also read that in nearly every posting I confirmed that Aaron has talent, that I like the concept of his work, and that it shows potential. Until now, I never have critisized the concept of his opera, nor the theme, the only thing I discussed is his way of orchestrating, that is it. Why? Because his orchestration is poor and way up for improvement, that is all. This has nothing to do with having written an opera or not having written an opera, this has nothing to do with his concept of trilogy, this has just and solely to do with his way of handling the orchestra as a musical instrument; that is the only issue I am discussing.

Kind regards,

Wolfgang

I'm sorry, I said that I was already irritated about what she said and I don't normally type like this. I'm usually very receptive, it's just I've not been having the best of luck lately. For that I apologize. You're comments make more sense to me than what my friend keeps telling me. If you'd like to tell my why you'd agree with her, though, I'd like to know. (Just remember, I like to debate by nature, so this is nothing against you.)

Although I am sort of insulted by your comments there toward the end of your message. We're supposed to be here to encourage each other and aid in eachother's musical growth and to wish me the worst of luck my saying that you hope I never get performed is an insult of the highest authority in my opinion.

What you write is true: we are here to help eachother out. What I wrote at the end was the logical consequence of what I felt and wrote before: it seemed to me that you did not want help anymore, so not wanting help generally means that one does not develop anymore, hence keeps making the same mistakes, hence stays at the same place, hence will receive the same comments, which would lead to what I wrote.

WG

P.S. apologies accepted.

Thank you.

I'm rewriting the opera as we speak. It's turning out alright... for contemporary, that is. So none of this score is any longer relivant.