July 31, 20178 yr Nice! I like how you explore the 'bounderies' of dissonances. Minor seconds are present, but they do not disturb the general mood of the piece. in my opinion, the parts are too static. As in: you write for two flutes, but these do not have very independent parts regarding rhythm. The same applies for the clarinet section. Luckily, you deviate from this on after 2/3 of the piece, but I think you could have used more independence in all voices throughout the entire composition. Furthermore, the piano part can be made more interesting and challenging by giving it some sort of melody instead of solely chords. The music is good, but I think it can be improved by using more independent voices.
July 31, 20178 yr I disagree with Maarten regarding the use of independent parts. I just think, rather, that the vertical nature of the piece could have been done a little bit better. You really have to imagine this piece as 3 superimposed piano parts, where when instruments play similar lines, join together. Here you'll see the awkwardness in any shift in variance you use in your chords. The whole thing felt a little dead to me because of it. 2 other things; experiment with slurs and stuff in your winds, and make sure that dynamic markings are directly under the corresponding notes. Cheers-
August 1, 20178 yr I'm unsure of this piece. While I like the overall sound of it -I'm a big fan of this type of music- I think that more could have been done. This makes sense though considering that you state this was just an idea. I'll refrain from really critiquing this until I see what you come up with -if you chose to rework this material.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.