Leaderboard

Good afternoon everyone! I'm fairly new to the forum, so I thought I would share something I wrote to introduce myself. I wrote this piece last year and finished around November, but just now decided to make a score so I could share it with you all. I'm interested in any and all feedback, as long as it's constructive. It is a rather long piece, so I included an outline if you would like to listen in "chunks". I used what you might call an "abbreviated sonata form": There is an Introduction, an Exposition stating two themes, an abbreviated Recapitulation of both themes, and a Resolution. (i.e. there is no development section) The outline is as follows: Introduction (0:00 - 5:13) Ominous opening, built around an ostinato figure (0:00 - 2:13) Lyrical theme (2:13 - 4:17) Return of ostinato figure, transition to exposition (4:17 - 5:13) A Theme of Exposition, somewhat manic and bombastic (5:13 - 7:09) B Theme of Exposition, pastoral yet deeply emotional (7:09 - 10:42) Brief transition to Recap of Exposition (10:42 - 11:21) Recap of A Theme, abbreviated (11:21 - 12:48) Recap of B Theme, abbreviated (12:48 - 15:07) Brief transition to Resolution (15:07 - 15:48) Resolution/Coda (15:48 - 19:21) As you listen, there are a few specific things I would be interested in your impression of: What is your favorite part? What is your least favorite part? While I have included a score and would certainly appreciate feedback on its appearance, I'm mostly concerned with feedback on technique, structure, orchestration, etc. How do you feel about the overall form? Does it work well? I am a former brass player, and know relatively little about string playing. Is my string writing convincing? What could be improved? What overall effect does the piece have on you? Does it create a certain image? Does it bring out a certain feeling? Anything else that jumps out at you. While I'm mostly happy with the way this piece turned out, there is certainly room for improvement. There are a lot of things I really like about it, but if I'm being real honest with myself I think the overall form falls a little flat, due to the lack of a development section. I dunno, maybe I'm too hard on myself, what do you guys think? Thanks for listening, and I hope you enjoy! If you have any questions about anything I did, feel free to ask and I will explain to the best of my ability. gmm New Piece for Orchestra.pdfNew Piece for Orchestra.mp3

Here is the link to my string quartet that I wrote in February, performed wonderfully by the Tippett Quartet. Do like, subscribe and comment what you think...! I'd love to hear it 🙂

First: What sound library is this? It sounds really good. As for your music -- this is a lovely piece, with lots of lush harmonies and effective dramatic moments. I am reminded of Debussy, Delius, and early Stravinsky (Firebird). A few notes: p. 23: I like how the timpani accents the downbeat before the tutti proper begins. p. 25 (first system): The horn-call reminds me very much of a leitmotiv from Strauss's Salome, which you can hear throughout the opera's finale, "Ah! Ich habe deinem Mund gekusst." Partly it's the strings playing tremolo, but the themes themselves are rather similar. Not similar enough to be a problem, though. Just thought I'd point it out. p. 25 (second system): I love the orchestration and harmonies here, how the brass provides the harmonic background and the woodwinds play over it. Very effective dramatically. p. 31: I like how the cymbal crash falls in the middle of the bar rather than on the downbeat, but I wonder if it might work better as a long, sustained roll (as in the Coda). p. 49: I liked the clarinet sextuplets here, which are later taken up by other woodwind instruments. But the woodwinds might appreciate an occasional rest so they have a chance to breathe. In figures like this, it's typical to put a rest on the downbeat. While this is a very good piece as it is, I agree with you that the form might need rethinking. Removing the Recap seems like a sensible idea and is probably the quickest solution. But I feel like this piece belongs in a larger context, which might help to reveal its "true" form. Perhaps it should be the slow movement of a symphony or part of a ballet (again, thinking of Firebird). Then, once you have the surrounding movements completed, you'd have a better idea of what this piece needs to make it complete. All in all, good work, and thanks for sharing!

Stirring, rich, intense. The harmonies were so lush. Everything about this piece was subtle—and I like that very much! I didn't find this work very Brahms-esque, or even German in particular. To me it sounded thoroughly French, with distinct hints of Saint-Saëns and Debussy. Your use of sixths especially gave it a Debussy flair, almost pentatonic at times. I love that about his music. The emotional landscape of this work had me visiting a mountain stream in the Norwegian fjordlands: fresh, crisp, unhurried and untouched by modernity. (Or perhaps I should say a mountain stream in the Alps, since this piece didn't necessarily remind me of Scandinavian writing.) I thought it was impressive how you interwove all the themes together. But I think the most impressive aspect of this piece was its emotional drive. It was just... moving. The swells, the softness, the orchestral color. I didn't tear up listening to the mp3, but I guarantee you I would have been undone had I heard it live in concert. Some criticism: the score is a bit messy and difficult to follow along as a conductor. Sibelius is a great notation program but I truly don't understand the algorithms behind its score layout program. I can give pointers, though it might best be done via personal message. Also, I was not a huge fan of the blatant recaps. I don't mind some, but once a section is over I don't want to hear it again in the piece, at least not so immediately recognizable. Just a matter of personal taste, I suppose, and nothing objectively wrong with the work. The ending was not what I expected, and I have mixed feelings about it. It was evocative how you brought back the opening structure, but I feel it should have ended either quietly or with much more movement. As it stands, it's sort of a hybrid between the two, and it wasn't a very convincing hybrid, at least not to me. Petty nitpicks notwithstanding, this is a work of superb stature. I bow to your masterful use of the orchestra. Looking forward to your next venture!

I think if you accomplished what you set out to accomplish in this piece you should be satisfied it. I certainly am! Well there is alot to compare to since Brahms so famously uses 3rds and 6ths copiously in his harmonies but here is one example: I didn't look at your score in detail so I didn't see what bowings you are talking about but from my experience string players like to write their own bowings into their parts when they find something counter-intuitive (of course coordinated by the concert-master). Otherwise the alternation of up and downs bows is pretty natural to them most of the time and doesn't need to be notated. Offended? LoL 🤣 Don't worry - I rarely revise my own work as well. I simply think my time (as much as yours) would probably best be spent applying what I've learned to new compositions. I am looking forward to it!👍

Wow! This is a wonderful piece! To start out I think I'd have to say that my favorite section is the lyrical section in the introduction and when it's recapitulated in the resolution/coda. I don't have a least favorite section. I don't think it's true that (as you say) your piece lacks a development. Your music has a very rich storytelling potential - you just express it through writing new themes and that gives your music the feel of a soundtrack. It's more of a melodic adventure I guess. I don't think you need to have a strict development section and trying to force yourself to have one could be just about the most un-creative thing you could do. Besides - when you recapitulate you certainly don't seem to ever do things the same way twice - and that at least counts as variation which is something I've been trying to get myself to do in my own composition (I mean through-composing my repeats and making them different the second time). I didn't listen with the score but you definitely seem to have found your own melodic and harmonic identity. Throughout the piece I get tastes of the flavors of other composers who have come before like Gershwin. And Brahms in the pastoral B section but nothing overwhelming that detracts from your unique identity. I don't think there's a problem with your string writing. You write well for the whole orchestra not just strings or brass. Being a horn player myself I really enjoy the beautiful melodic lines you've written for it throughout and especially the pastoral B section and the lyrical theme from the introduction. About your form - I think it's almost unfair to call your ostinato from the beginning and the lyrical section 'introductory'. They obviously don't stay 'introductory' since you use them throughout the whole piece. I think you have probably over 5 unique themes interwoven into this and no particular one of them takes precedence except maybe the themes, ironically, that you start and end with. A cool moment you have is the big build you have that starts right before the 7:00 minute mark. I love the descending brass and the soft resolution with strings and horn. Well, that just about does it for me. I hope you submit more compositions =). Edit: I just looked at the introduction in your score and I guess I should have heard this but your flutes which are so important to your texture in the introduction are way too low in their register to be audible. One way to fix this would be to have a G alto flute play that lowest C#.

Really lovely, can I ask you about the title, is the work programmatic or does it just fit a particular mood ?

I absolutely love writing for string quartet -probably due to the fact I play viola (?) That said, there's a few things to consider: 1. Strings possess similar timbre and sound. Each string also has it's own unique qualities. On the viola, for instance, the A string (the smallest) possesses a more nasal tone quality. That doesn't mean it can't sing as well as the E string on the violin. Cello's have a very resonant sound throughout much of their range -thus, they can cut through to be fully audible through even the busiest string textures. 2. Writing for string quartet, it's important to remember that each part while -as Luis pointed out- maintaining and independent character ALSO work together in a more conversational manner. This nature of string quartet writing can be found throughout the repertoire from the earliest to the most modern. So, yes, you want each part to be independent to some degree -but you also have to unify the parts into a cohesive whole. (Not that 4 competing parts wouldn't be an interesting premise -if done in a way that presents itself cohesively). 3. Strings when playing unison provide a strong effect -and should be used when needed. To get an idea of it, listen to the opening of Beethoven's Grosses Fugue (originally part of the Opus 131 quartet). In the opening, Beethoven presents the melodic notes of the fugue in full unison. The effect is powerful. 4. Do cross voices. While, traditionally, one is taught to preserve the SATB nature of quartet writing by NOT crossing voices, within string literature, it is customary and expected for the strings to cross voices -particularly for quartets. Again, each line 'converses' with one another -adding it's own two cents within your textures. This can be achieved without crossing -but... you'd be missing out on exploiting the full range of the strings. 5. Don't neglect the inner voices. While 2nd violin and viola -especially in the early days of the form- are customarily given accompaniment material, they also add unique qualities to the quartet. Don't forget to give them decent material to play. Trust me, from a violists point of view, the instrument can do much more than provide harmonic and rhythmic accompaniment. 6. A String Quartet is not a concerto. While you may be writing a string quartet for 4 'divas', those divas do come together much more intimately. It's chamber music, after all. And this gets me to my last comment regarding the form: String Quartets often provide a fuller glimpse into both the talent and the personality of the composer -even in the modern era. From Mozart (who transcribed Constanza's labor pains into one quartet) to Shostakovich (who grappled heavily with state suppression of his modernist tendencies), the catalogue is replete with countless examples of this. String Quartets provide a composer with 4 instruments that possess similar timbre -that means you can't fake it with orchestration. Your music HAS to be on point. Your form, structure, and motivic material lay raw and bare. There has to be substance -or else the entire work will flop. I don't mean to make the form sound so lofty -but that is the reality of the beast (whether we like to admit it or not). Many composers gave the form the best compositional prowess they had to offer. It's no wonder that a lot of modernists, especially in the early days, composed very few string quartet works for this very reason. It's a difficult ensemble to compose for. You can't just hide behind instrumentational coloring. You actually have to compose. *gasp*