if you make a light do not hide it in a box beneath your bed

This piece is an exploration of an idea that was gleaned from thereading of several essays from Steve Reich's book, "Writings on Music, 1965-2000." As a furthering of Reich's additive harmonic process, I have explored a rhythmic process that is at times additive and subtractive. I have done this by expanding or contracting the duration of consecutive notes by one sixteenth in duration (ranging from a note 8 sixteenth notes in duration to a note 1 sixteenthnote in duration.) Occasionally, this type of rhythmic jest is interjected with a toying of the duration of rests. As far as time signature is concerned, the meter used has been chosen to help the performers coordinate downbeats and is in no way reflective of beat stress hierarchy. The title refers to a line from the Christian Scriptures, from Luke's Gospel: (8: 16, NRSV) "No one after lighting a lamp hides it under a jar, or puts it under a bed, but puts it on a lampstand, so that those who enter may see the light."I hope you enjoy, the pitches are taken from a serious of jazz 9th chord voicings, assigned in a rather arbitrary fashion - the players were sight reading and the percussionist makes a few mistakes - please forgive him.

if you make a light do not hide it in a box beneath your bed

Hey, Matthew. Do you go by Matt? I like this piece, and I love your title. How does the title relate to the music?

I like the F#/A switches between clarinet and cello around 20 and how the notes come together around 26. The timbral shifts are some of the more interesting aspects of the piece to me. I didn't really hear the accel. at 49 in the recording, but at least the marimba player tried to separate the notes. You might want to specify the end tempo for the accel. to give the performers some idea of where to go. 70 reminds me of an ambulance; that's a nice register for the clarinet. And the last clarinet note is low and rich. I didn't really hear a climax, although I suppose the understated accel. serves that purpose. What happened to the 32nd notes after the opening measures? I expected some very short notes like that to come back. I can appreciate the rhythmic subtraction/addition and the free-flowing feel of the piece (in my latest pieces I've been writing out what I need rhythmically and going back to add meter changes so it's easier for performers to read).

Notationally, I'd put the marimba below the cello. Yes the cello typically plays lower notes more often, but the marimba is a percussion instrument plus you're using a grand staff so it will look cleaner on the bottom. Do you really need 3 different clefs for the cello? Accidentals in front of notes tied over to a new system (like in m. 81) are unnecessary and look awkward.

Nice work. I loved hearing the live recording.

Well, I don't have much to add to Orpheus' comments. I will say msr 47 - 58 approx with the repeated notes in the marimba while clarinet and cello have held notes is extremely effective and quite beautiful - creates this tense angst like atmosphere - I think the use od the high D in the clarinet clinches it.

I will say the limited pitch material is tough to accept after awhile - I realize for my tastes that you could have gone further with the timbral and rhythmic exploration (again more octave displacement - and yes even a bit of hocket ... ) but then not sure how you have maintained the introspective quality of it (done by not having a ton of octave displacements, focusing much more on rhythm, a little on tempi, dynamics and contrasting timbres).

The end works fairly well but I would have liked to hear with the held notes a pulsation of fluctuating dynamics (nothing drastic mf - ppp) which would diminish so we hear the moving line more and more clearly. I think it would give the piece just a tad stronger finality while adhering to your process. Look forward to hearing more from you and congrats on a lovely performance.

Black Orpheus: I prefer Matthew, but will accept Matt.

You say that the timbral shifts are the most interesting parts of the piece, what do you think I could do to have all the elements of the piece more unified and in equilibrium? Thanks for the suggestion on a goal for the accelerando, I think even a range would be helpful - hadn't even given that one a think! I considered bringing the 32nd notes back, but also considered that the piece had a gradual slowdown as it moves down in rhythms with a certain amount of periodicity.

composerorganist: I'm so glad you found that part effective - if anything i found it tedious! Thank you for your suggestion on dynamics for the ending, I think I will definitely consider it for new pieces in the future - that is wise.

any comments greatly appreciated. :)