Gentle Winds 1rst movement

Hi I composed this Wind Quintet, its 12 tone and I was wondering if anyone could help with checking the spelling. The piece itself is done and my main concern is now making it as readable as possible. The score is also transposed.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z2Rklc0NyWTGlxcjtitSqk2fFByDzm_f/view?usp=drivesdk

Edited 14 hours ago14 hr by Rafael Avila

Hi @Rafael Avila !

First off, I don't know if it is customary to use a transposed score for serial works. Perhaps due to the dissonant textures and lack of key center it is preferrable to a transposed score? I personally prefer transposed scores because then you see exactly what the player sees and the logic of the enharmonics is different and customized.

Btw, would you provide an mp3 of the piece as well? I've noticed from the score that some parts of it might even be perceived as tonal.

Now to picking at the enharmonics. In measure 3 you have the flute playing this:

Since you have a leap here of a major 7th I would spell the notes in this measure as C#, B#, A#, Fx. And since the part continues in the next measure to D# and B it makes more sense (to me) to continue using sharps here. You might think that since the harmony underneath that is basically D minor, that using your spellings would be more logical in that context. That could be true, and I wouldn't blame you for keeping it the way you have it now. But it also depends on how devoid of key the piece actually is. Is this just a short moment of quasi-tonality in the midst of atonal surroundings? Or do various key centers actually play a part in the piece and how it will be perceived by the listener? On a cursory glance at just the beginning of the score it doesn't seem particular dissonant or atonal and uses lots of consonances and octave doublings. Like I said, I am no 12-tone serial connoisseur but this seems like a no-no for a serial work.

Basically - if the piece is tonal here and there, adhere to tonal voice-leading rules in those situations. But if the piece is more devoid of a tonal center then spell the pitches as logically as possible within each individual voice regardless of what the other voices are doing in a sense. That's how I would do it.

Thanks for sharing and I'd be stoked to hear this piece!

12 minutes ago, PeterthePapercomPoser said:

Hi @Rafael Avila !

First off, I don't know if it is customary to use a transposed score for serial works. Perhaps due to the dissonant textures and lack of key center it is preferrable to a transposed score? I personally prefer transposed scores because then you see exactly what the player sees and the logic of the enharmonics is different and customized.

Btw, would you provide an mp3 of the piece as well? I've noticed from the score that some parts of it might even be perceived as tonal.

Now to picking at the enharmonics. In measure 3 you have the flute playing this:

Since you have a leap here of a major 7th I would spell the notes in this measure as C#, B#, A#, Fx. And since the part continues in the next measure to D# and B it makes more sense (to me) to continue using sharps here. You might think that since the harmony underneath that is basically D minor, that using your spellings would be more logical in that context. That could be true, and I wouldn't blame you for keeping it the way you have it now. But it also depends on how devoid of key the piece actually is. Is this just a short moment of quasi-tonality in the midst of atonal surroundings? Or do various key centers actually play a part in the piece and how it will be perceived by the listener? On a cursory glance at just the beginning of the score it doesn't seem particular dissonant or atonal and uses lots of consonances and octave doublings. Like I said, I am no 12-tone serial connoisseur but this seems like a no-no Hi yes the composition is a full 12 tone piece, I just mess with the tone row alot, the moments of tonal feel, are more just me trying to ease the listener as more dissonance comes in. I feel your suggestion for the spelling is a bit odd as ive been told to avoid using B# and especially Fx. Im more trying to focus on the vertical rather then trying to match with the other parts, as I have lines that invert so ill be left with very ugly spelling and killed by any performer.

Hi thx for the feedback, we usually try and avoid B#, and especially FX. Ik the 2nd Vietnamese school used them but ive been told by my Prpfessors not to use those spellings. Also yes the piece does have some tonal moments, but that's more for color. So i try nt to base spelling on the horizontal movement but the vertical. There's two many parts where id be making weird spelling choices if I did that.

As for the piece being transposed I thought thats how the players read the parts? I do also have a C score obviously.

Also heres the musescore mockup audio if u wanna hear it, like I said its done.

Gentle Winds mp3

48 minutes ago, Rafael Avila said:

2nd Vietnamese school

😆

10 minutes ago, Henry Ng Tsz Kiu said:

😆

It autocorrected!!!!

1 hour ago, Rafael Avila said:

As for the piece being transposed I thought thats how the players read the parts? I do also have a C score obviously.

Sorry - I was confused - I thought the score you provided was a concert pitch score.

It seems your mp3 has more material than the score does - are these the beginnings of a 2nd movement?

There's some more things concerning articulation that I noticed like for example here:

I think the notes that aren't staccato in the above passage should definitely be slurred for clarity of performance - otherwise, in sight-reading that's something that would be easy to miss. I know you include legato and slurs in many other places throughout the piece so I'm puzzled why you forgot them here.

1 hour ago, Rafael Avila said:

Also yes the piece does have some tonal moments, but that's more for color. So i try nt to base spelling on the horizontal movement but the vertical. There's two many parts where id be making weird spelling choices if I did that.

Yes - I totally agree there. I was mistaken in my whole discussion before as I was reading the score as a concert pitch score.

Musically speaking my only critique is that, since the whole piece is at the same tempo, there aren't any changes in character within the duration of the piece. The whole piece comes across as a sort of 12-tone invention with many recurring and recognizable rhythmic and melodic motifs. It is interesting as that, but I think it could be so much more if there were changes of character for each different motif. I enjoyed listening nonetheless and thanks for sharing the recording!

51 minutes ago, PeterthePapercomPoser said:

Sorry - I was confused - I thought the score you provided was a concert pitch score.

It seems your mp3 has more material than the score does - are these the beginnings of a 2nd movement?

There's some more things concerning articulation that I noticed like for example here:

I think the notes that aren't staccato in the above passage should definitely be slurred for clarity of performance - otherwise, in sight-reading that's something that would be easy to miss. I know you include legato and slurs in many other places throughout the piece so I'm puzzled why you forgot them here.

Yes - I totally agree there. I was mistaken in my whole discussion before as I was reading the score as a concert pitch score.

Musically speaking my only critique is that, since the whole piece is at the same tempo, there aren't any changes in character within the duration of the piece. The whole piece comes across as a sort of 12-tone invention with many recurring and recognizable rhythmic and melodic motifs. It is interesting as that, but I think it could be so much more if there were changes of character for each different motif. I enjoyed listening nonetheless and thanks for sharing the recording!

Yes there is a 2nd movement, thx for pointing out to add slurs there. I mainly wanted to focus on the spelling on the 1rst movement, so I can take the insight and bring it to the other movement.

Hello

Firstly, I’d like to say that I think it’s a brilliant piece and I’ve really enjoyed it. I’m just as drawn to modern languages as I am to the classical ones.

As for the notation you’ve suggested, I think it’s fine as it is. In this context, as long as it’s clear, whether or not there are enharmonic alterations is a secondary consideration.

I’m not sure what your intention was with this piece – whether it was to draw closer to the style of expression of that Second Viennese School, or rather to use a highly chromatic language in your own way.

I say this because, although the absence of stable tonal centres is evident, the way this quintet is written departs from the typical characteristics of expressionism.

Things that I believe are not characteristic (and I’m not saying this is either better or worse): the use of ‘homophony’, of several parallel lines—some doubled, others at different intervals. Expressionism, when it employs chamber ensembles, is essentially contrapuntal and pointillistic. There are sections that have that effect to a greater extent.

Composing within this system is by no means easy. Many people think you simply take a twelve-tone row or whatever and start placing notes, inverted rows, retrograde rows and so on… But no.

The tricky bit is mastering the language to the point where you know exactly what you’re doing, primarily to control the moments of tension and release.

Furthermore, cadences – not understood in terms of the functional tonal system – are also important.

12 minutes ago, Luis Hernández said:

Hello

Firstly, I’d like to say that I think it’s a brilliant piece and I’ve really enjoyed it. I’m just as drawn to modern languages as I am to the classical ones.

As for the notation you’ve suggested, I think it’s fine as it is. In this context, as long as it’s clear, whether or not there are enharmonic alterations is a secondary consideration.

I’m not sure what your intention was with this piece – whether it was to draw closer to the style of expression of that Second Viennese School, or rather to use a highly chromatic language in your own way.

I say this because, although the absence of stable tonal centres is evident, the way this quintet is written departs from the typical characteristics of expressionism.

Things that I believe are not characteristic (and I’m not saying this is either better or worse): the use of ‘homophony’, of several parallel lines—some doubled, others at different intervals. Expressionism, when it employs chamber ensembles, is essentially contrapuntal and pointillistic. There are sections that have that effect to a greater extent.

Composing within this system is by no means easy. Many people think you simply take a twelve-tone row or whatever and start placing notes, inverted rows, retrograde rows and so on… But no.

The tricky bit is mastering the language to the point where you know exactly what you’re doing, primarily to control the moments of tension and release.

Furthermore, cadences – not understood in terms of the functional tonal system – are also important.

Thx im really glad you enjoyed the piece. Yea i think im just overly cautious about making my composition the nest it can be which includes readability. Also this isnt my first 12 tone piece ive written several and id consider myself a 12 tone composer.

Yes I do break certain guidelines as I let my ear guide me as I compose and structure the piece on the piano. I recently composed a piano piece which is more traditional, influenced by Webern, and Dallapiccola.

13 minutes ago, Rafael Avila said:

Yes I do break certain guidelines as I let my ear guide me as I compose and structure the piece on the piano. I recently composed a piano piece which is more traditional, influenced by Webern, and Dallapiccola.

Right.

I’ve always thought that, from our current perspective, it’s great to be familiar with all kinds of earlier systems and languages, including, of course, those of the 20th and 21st centuries.

And that these foundations can be used however one wishes.

Sometimes it’s good to try writing in the style of Mozart, or Debussy, or Webern, and so on… Especially when you’re learning.

But when it comes to composing, I think you have to give free rein to your creativity and use elements from the systems that resonate with you at that moment.

Lately, I’ve been delving a bit deeper into Stravinsky’s rotational matrices from his later period, and I find them fascinating, so I’ve incorporated them into some of the pieces I’m working on.

Best regards.