Leaderboard

I am so excited to present to you a culmination of a year's worth of work, in the form of a complete keyboard suite in the style of Bach! Overture - Allemande - Courante - Air - Scherzo & Trio - Sarabande - Bourrées - Gigue (35:14) Suite structure. Please see the individual videos from my playlist on Youtube for comments on the separate movements. Below I give a description of the suite. I have treated the Suite as a vehicle to explore general principles of composing 18th-century Baroque music. Thereby, a great deal of care has been taken to select a diverse variety of metres, tempos, textures, and importantly - forms, all arranged suitably so the Suite movements display variety, balance, and symmetry. Consequently, the "aria ritornello shape", Bach's form/method of choice for composing binary dance movements, is only strictly observed in the Scherzo. We find, across the Suite, two fugues, a canon, a free aria, a chorale fantasia, an invention, and more. The degree of formality ranges across the entire spectrum too: on one end, we have the Air which is utterly free in its construction, bound only by a loose pattern and a search for the home key; on the other, the fugue of the Overture, where a small number of musical ideas - triple counterpoint, the four-bar episodic sequence, the motif said sequence exploits etc. - found in the ritornello theme, together with stretto, are ruthlessly and systematically developed. Everything else falls somewhere in-between. The Overture is essentially a standalone movement, displaying some of the toolkit of the Suite at work. Then, at the centre of the Suite we find a Scherzo and Trio with orchestral ambitions, showcasing the dynamics and timbres of the keyboard, balancing a great variety of textures, and represents an utterly stereotypical Bachian dance movement. Surrounding the Scherzo are two slow, 4-part lyrical dances in 3/4 time: the Air and the Sarabande. They contrast each other with the former being a totally free, homophonic aria and the latter being a formal piece, strictly focussed on two themes and juxtaposing textures. Furthermore, the Suite is enclosed by the Allemande and the Gigue, both of which employ (maybe) well-known themes in different contexts. The former as a "chorale" prelude, and the latter as a full-fledged, fun, double fugue! The Courante can be seen as a natural extension of the Allemande, continuing with the same rhythmic ideas introduced in the repeats of the Allemande, eventually turning the Courante, on its own repeats, into an elaborately ornamented piece. And the Bourrées...Well, they were composed seven years ago, and revising them last year served as the inspiration for me to write an entire keyboard suite. So they are where everything started! It goes without saying that the style is supposed to be Bachian, and a few of these movements are inspired, to varying degrees, by certain Bach pieces. All comments, suggestions, critiques are welcome, particular those concerning the style! If you spot any grammatical mistakes like part-writing errors or consecutives then please also let me know! I'm quite proud of the Suite, but it is by no means perfect. It is playable, but parts of certain movements are unnecessarily difficult, with the Overture being the worst offender. If you are interested in performing this Suite then please let me know. I'd be very happy revising these movements with playability heavily in consideration. There is also evidence of my own "style" here, for example, the diversity of forms, as discussed. Another example is my choice of textures. I like rich sounds, so my texture of choice is explicit three or four-part writing. This is in contrast to a typical Bach keyboard suite, where the dominating texture is two-part writing, sometimes with densely layered melodies! If you have read up to here, well done and thank you! This Suite is a genuine labour of love. I hope I have made your day just a bit better with this work.

What I was really getting at with that point I made was being familiar doesn't necessarily mean you have to be safe. For instance, I play guitar, so being able to write something in a key utilizing the open strings makes playability for harder passages possibly easier, or where I am on the neck or what position I'm in might be better suited somewhere else. Of course you should push the boundaries of your writing, but knowing your instrument can help you achieve that in a more practical way versus thinking theoretically about it. Apparently we're bombarding MissCello's post haha. Sorry!

Hahaha, I unfortunately know this too well. Most of what I write for piano I can't personally play, but at least I have familiarity (like you do with your accordion piece) since I play piano. Conversely, I'd love to see the look on your face if I handed you an accordion piece I wrote. The thought of you spitting on the score then burning it makes me laugh 😄

I appreciate your feedback and I think I see what you mean about the string passage. It’s purpose is to be a bridge between be two halves of the piece, and I kind of wanted a sort of ethereal feel where it just sort of *happens* and the atmosphere resumes. I may have the timpani play underneath it to maintain the connection, I think that may help.

here is a song I wrote about leaning peaks.

The purpose of those dynamics gradually decreasing is to produce the effect of a fading echo. The clarinet should be that quiet there, that motive needs to disappear, this is the intended effect.

I thnk that in the first exercise the progression mentioned VII6 I6 is a bit "void" because both chords have been reduced to two tones.

Dear @Guardian25, The rules are of the four part writing only. I check this out quickly and may miss some other things. For the 1st exercise, the VII6 chord is not good. A vii chord is a diminished chord and the third should be doubled, which the E is doubled here, but the leading tone should never be doubled since they both should resolve to tonic. Also the G is missed. A V6 or V6/5 chord will be better here with one C# changed. In the last two chords sopranos and bass are in parallel octaves. I will change the penultimate chord to a V7 chord will C# and G in soprano and alto. For the second one is OK. For the third one I will also finish with perfect cadence instead of having a vii6 chord before the tonic. For the fourth one is OK. Keep writing! Henry

There're only Spanish Sarabandes😅. Maybe I add Spanish because you are Spanish too! It's nice of you to post your older works here! I just love them but sometimes I don't give good advices since I love them. I love how direct you are in your works, even if sometimes it becomes abrupt. That sometimes makes me forget about other things in your music and thus I cannot give a more valuable reply to you.

Part of my Keyboard Suite WIP. The Suite is almost completely finished (a Courante left). I'll try to get the whole Suite compiled and released before the new year!

Oh nice, it's not suspicious at all that all staff reviewed this. I did definitely not bribe anyone here. Since I'm no expert on Sarabandes, I don't really know the difference between a Spanish one and say, a German one, but thanks for the compliment (?), lol. Yeah it doesn't convince me much either. There should be a rubato there at the very least, plus some dynamics, which would perhaps make those 2 bars less dry hence the transition less abrupt and unconvincing. Thank you for your review Henry, it's always nice to check that a post I had forgotten I made got insightful reviews like yours. ♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫♫ The forums? Oh yeah definitely! LOL. Oh yeah that might be a consequence of myself not thinking "vertically" or something like that and minding more about the tempo structure in 5/2 (intro) 3/2 (main stuff) and 2/2 (complementary theme) (something that I might or might not have done in Noc. 2 for example). Now is where I could invent something regarding my very artistic intentions on evoking the natural asymmetry but conciliation of the sounds produced by the grand piano by opposing 4/2 vs. 5/2 but you know it's obviously a mistake in case nobody noticed. Definitely. I'll fix that. I just found how to do it quick pressing J in MS3 days ago, lol. Right now it's very ugly to read, thank you for noticing Peter. Guys, thanks for the valuable feedback, really. It always makes me come back to my not so recent works and give them another go. Kind regards ^^!

Thanks for the insight! I am still trying to figure out how to render the sounds. Like you said the balance between the instruments are off and I will need to work on how to balance the sounds better. I have also been working with the new musescore update, so I'm still trying to get more familiar with the software! I will also experiment with the articulations as well! Once I get the main parts finished I will add those and dynamics! Thanks for the feedback! 🙏

I agree. I had never written a wind quintet before, and I wrote that piece as a challenge to myself. Before I even wrote a single note I listened to damn near everything on youtube for wind quintets and busted out my orchestration book. It was great to dig into all of that

Yes, Czerny: Yes, he again: 🙂

Yeah definitely. For example in writing ( ) I am familiar with instruments and try to write things I can play and at the same time good. But sometimes for instruments we are not familiar with, we won't know where is the limit. I think writing someting impracticable and knowing that can also be a great learning experience.

Really, we have to fail to success or fail better. Better to move beyond the limit to know how far you can stretch to than limited endlessly by fearing of touching the limit of the instruments. That will help us learn more than writing hunderds of safe pieces since you never what the potential of the instruments, motives, forms are. @Omicronrg9 mentions that my pieces venture to other places at the end. It's true and I really let my muse direct me, rather than safely staying within the boundary of the previous sections, because you won't know what the muse give to you. If the muse directs you to a wrong place, you can always delete the passages, but if you miss that, you miss forever. Everytime my muse is right. S/he really stretches me and my pieces! You can also try that, since you are really talented! I hope I was that talented like you when I was in your age Henry

Thanks Henry! Didn't mean to forget you, I already gave you a purple cup trophy! LOL

Hi! Straight to what I found "troublesome" or at least worth mentioning: • The audio, at least on my end, is a little unbalanced and saturated. The harpsichord eats the flute on the very first bars; then it's eaten by the strings too. • Since the work is not completed and I am not sure of how much you've worked on this, perhaps it's that you just haven't reached this point yet, but just in case: I don't see articulation nor dynamics in any instrument (the latter is usual considering it's a harpsichord, though there are ways to produce dynamics there too) and in my humble opinion, these alone would improve the current state of this piece significantly. More specifically, just putting slurs properly in the flute and strings may likely help any potential performer, unless you do want the whole piece to be non-legato which is very legit too of course. The idea is good so far and I look forward to see this trio finished. Keep writing mate, for that's —likely— one of the most effective ways of improving those skills, isn't it? Kind regards, Daniel–Ømicrón.

Dear @Alex Weidmann, Oh you don't thank me for listening!!😡 (Just kidding!) For the Crystal Ocean one I actually find mysterious and beguiling. I enjoy this one! So comfortable to hear to. I like the waterdrops in the second one!! I love this one the best out of the three! The waterdrops fill up the otherwise static gap! You know, the waterdrops really propel me to sleep! Too comfortable to listen to! This can be put in the bed shops I guess. Henry

In fact despite not knowing almost any word in Italian outside musical terms I understood those perfectly :), advantages of close linguistic relationship between Italy and Spain I guess. I'll be honoured! The AI is like a more or less smart brush. Despite it does its work amazingly, it is kinda difficult (nowhere near actually drawing that from scratch in my case at least) to make it understand your thoughts, and even in the case one manages to excel at that part (not my case), edition work (sometimes heavy) is always needed. Now, regarding your concertino: • There are some definitely Mozart-esque parts, you're right, but I'm not much of a Mozart connoisseur so not much more to add in that regard. • The entire piece, despite not extreme in any sense, feels a bit effortful, like if you were trying to push out every trick you had at hand at that time while keeping in mind the style mentioned above. • Overall it sounds good though a little disorganized, and it is true that it's at least a world or two far away from "Windchill" and "Violet". And finally, regarding your melody for an Android: • The music-box-like sound got me immersed. I don't remind seeing the movie, but anyway, I cannot comment too much on it due to its brevity. I liked it despite of that and its obviously intended "emptiness" in the way it doesn't get stuffed with lots of synths nor unneeded sound effects is something that I valued positively in this case. As @Thatguy v2.0 said, keep composing! Ah, true, now that I mentioned you Vince: Let me show you the way. It's called "composing beyond your possibilities" and it produces VERY questionable but in fact unplayable (by oneself) works, like my very first sonata that I made for accordion: 41 - Sonata Nº1 (Acordeón).pdf Yes, I just spammed my work into 'nother user's post, but hey in exchange I'll review some more posts :B and the score itself has some issues anyway. Now seriously, keep with the good work MissCello! Kind regards, Daniel–Ømicrón.

lol, you are not a quasi-modernist, you ARE a modernist...

Hello! Thank you for the kind words. I was listening to progressive jazz at the time (namely a new-ish trio from my father's home country of Poland -- Immortal Onion) and it must have colored my music. Haha, it seems I keep writing small ensemble pieces and members keep referring to competitions I had no idea about! I am honestly just rediscovering this site after a long hiatus. I would love to see the saxophone quartet contest. Please and thank you!

Hello! I love this piece. I appreciate the sense of mystery you created by starting with a single voice, and it made me smile when you brought it back later on. The tonality throughout is chilling and cinematic. This is unrelated to composition, but I would suggest putting about a second of silence at the beginning of the track so the music doesn't start the moment we hit play -- a habit I've been practicing. You create suspense very well. But, I felt somewhat disappointed when the clarinet at 2:43 was so much quieter than the previous instruments -- the sudden drop in dynamic undermines for me the effect of repeating the phrase three times, which is often a very strong musical device. I would either make the dynamic shift more gradual by making the oboe statement slightly softer, or bump up the clarinet's dynamic. 🙂 One more suggestion: When you bring that section back at 8:19, it might add even more interest to sustain the final note that each instrument plays even as the next instrument begins. For example, the flute could hold an Eь for the rest of bar 103, the oboe could have a tied half note in 104, and the clarinet's written F in 105 could be held slightly longer. Of course, it is your piece and you do establish a strong sense of return to familiarity, which I like a lot! Thank you for sharing this lovely soundscape. ~ Gwendolyn

I think your initial material is very tuneful. A few caveats: 1. I feel the static waltz in the left hand is a little bland. I'd like to see more interplay between the hands. Don't be afraid to invert the two... give the harmony to the right and let the left explore the scalar motif into the depths of the instrument. OR you could interplay the scalar material thru both. 2. Bars 78 - 93, as Henry mentioned, don't quite diverge enough to be exactly contrasting material. I think this is where the first motif in your melody could be very much developed -given you take the scalar material above like I suggested. Venture into some further tonal areas and really push your harmonic a bit -much like the waltz kings did in their works. That said, I greatly enjoyed watching the process in INCOMPLETE WORKS. Hope to see this work a little more refined.

Yayyyy!!! Another quasi-modernist! Now, I don't feel quite so alone on here!!!!! That said, I really enjoyed this piece. The saxophone writing is quite nice. I love the almost Parisian feel of it -yet a little jazzy at times. There's a competition for saxophone quartet -which I thought at first you were entering. I think you should consider it. Let me know if you're interested and I'll send you the link!

This certainly doesn't seem like a lament.... or even melancholic in any way. I hate saying it.... but it almost sounds like one of those 1980 slow pop diddies. I'm guessing that's the instrumentation? That said, a score would definitely help weed through the midi rendering and give us a better idea what you're going for.

Thank you for the examples of the Spanish directions, the context you use them in makes sense to me. I will consider changing all the directions in "Violet" to Italian, though, if there is any chance the piece may one day end up in the hands of musicians who don't understand English -- Italian may have a better chance of being understood in that case since I believe "sospirando" is understood by many advanced musicians and the meaning of "come un profondo sospiro" can probably be extrapolated. I appreciate you sharing my music once again! I will use the image and credit you -- thank you for your permission! Even knowing it was made largely by AI I am still so drawn to it. ~ Gwendolyn Update: I've just changed the directions to Italian and corrected some strange note spellings and attached the new PDF.

yes bassoon then doubled with oboe and English horn, the most whiny combo in the orchestra lolol! I love how they sound together esp in mysterious areas of a piece. Thank u for being so nice to my dear works brah!

I love the two contrasting sections alternating each other: one is in solicitude, unsure, other on thick texture and so beautiful. I actually like all the sections with strings. I like how you depict icescape: It's huge but at the same time can be easily ruined. Henry

These guys are really funny https://www.youtube.com/@twosetviolin You gotta watch this episode: The World's FASTEST (and most INACCURATE) VIOLINIST!

Interesting exchange occurring here -yet this topic isn't something new on this forum. First, let me correct a few false statements above: Harmony: Harmony wasn't the original basis of music prior to roughly the year 1650 (and some would argue 1700) -at least here in the West. Prior to the advent of the Baroque, music focused on the horizontal relationship between different contrapuntal lines. This is why intervallic relationships were focused on to such extent -with some intervals being nearly outlawed due to perceived dissonances. A deep perusal of music literature from before the advent of the Baroque Era would really open some ears -as some of the music from those epochs was almost up to what we'd expect of this modern era. Who Were the Public? It's important to remember that the history of classical music (and I use the term as the Twitter author did in its generic reference to the overarching genre itself) is -for the most part- is the history of the aristocracy. Composers prior to late Mozart and Beethoven were employed by the aristocratic class. Their music was written for aristocratic ears. The audiences outside of the court that came to hear their music weren't your modern-day Jack and Jill. They were nobles, middle class merchants, and people with mobility. This historic reality is the centerpiece of the modern-day perception of concert hall music as being for the wealthy. So, when we say they wrote their music for the public... that's not entirely true. Later composers, post Mozart and Beethoven, are a bit different. While many of them didn't work in royal courts or church posts, they still targeted audiences of mobility. We don't hear of Mahler going to the impoverished, working-class neighborhoods and performing his works -nor do we hear of Prokofiev performing his works in the ghettos of Moscow. Just as with businesses today, you have to go where those who will buy your products are. Patrons of classical music aren't commonly found working in gas stations and fast-food restaurants. Church Legacy: The legacy of the Catholic Church in Europe is a mixed bag. While it is true that the church forbids pagan worship -and went to great lengths to bring the flock away from worshipping a blade of grass, it isn't true to say that the church destroyed 90% of the ancient world and the knowledge therein. Quite the opposite is true in that regard. We owe a great debt to the church in terms of its fastidious monks painstakingly transcribing the works of Socrates, Plato, Plutarch, Josephus, and countless other ancient historians/philosophers from throughout Europe and the Mediterranean basin. We also owe the church a great debt in their written records of ancient cultures and non-Christian traditions. Further, the church was largely responsible for transforming the decayed remains of the Roman collapse into a breeding ground for the ideas that led to the Renaissance. It may have taken a thousand or so years to recover... but it did. Now, thats not to say that the ancient knowledge preserved by the Church was not tinkered with to promote the pro-Christian doctrine -that's another argument. Anthropological View of Music: Music activates the same areas as speech in the Human Brain. What does this mean? That means music is similar to a spoken language. We also know that music has been with our species since very early in our evolutionary development. Bone flutes and other musical artifacts have been uncovered throughout Africa -a testament to early man's immediate interest in music. So, from this, there isn't any consensus that there was a 'restart from square one' of musical theory and practice. Just like any other linguistic, music has steadily evolved and mutated alongside all of our other cultural relics. What this means is that just like pottery or construction type, all human creations are subject to the cultural norms and toolkit available at any given time (more on this in a minute). So the take away from the above points is that many of these topics are interconnected. Its a fascinating topic on something so subjective. Anyways, now for my opinion on all of this: Music is music. Modern generations aren't that different from those that came before. Where else can you hear dissonant chords and twelve-tone rows being played in front of millions of screaming fans (Nirvana, Metallica, SOTD, Seether, etc.)? Where else can you hear atonal collages that encourage psychedelic usage (Jefferson Airplane, The Doors, The Screaming Trees, Phish)? While I only mentioned modern artists here... I could also include the Troubadours of Spain and Italy from the Medieval and Renaissance periods (though its difficult to pinpoint exactly who the audiences for these ancient avant garde artists were). The focus here isn't on the quality of the music that these artists created, but instead should be on the tools they are using to create their work. If we look at the entirety of the genre of Classical music (not just the masterworks), we notice that many of what we consider modern tools appear over and over again in composers as distinct as Palestrina, Scarlatti, Purcell, Mozart, Debussy, etc. The tools have always been available for use by any who wish to use them -regardless of legal ramifications (and this important to remember). So whether your Mozart or Jason Lacy doesn't necessarily make much of a difference in terms of the tools that you use to make your music. So what is the difference? What makes the music of Stravinsky different from the music of Soundgarden? Why is Mendellsohn so far removed from Justin Bieber? The answer comes down to the audience and the marketability of the music itself (at least here in the modern era). While there is value in the Rite of Spring... its hard to take such a large work and market it to masses at an economically feasible means. That 4 minute diddy by Bieber, on the other hand, is primed for the masses in that it is written and produced expressly to be marketable. That's fact. It doesn't mean that the musical content of "Boyfriend' is elementary in its use of musical technique -though many would argue that is the case. It also doesn't mean that the audiences who consume modern pop music aren't capable of consuming Schoenberg's Pierrot Lunaire. The brains are the same after all. Thus, the question shouldn't be which is better: Pop or Classics? Instead, it should be how do we take classical music and make it marketable to a much larger audience than it has ever received?

Hi! I'd like to share my another chamber piece (saxophone quartet) for your comments... Actually I wrote this piece inspired by Jazz or Bebop I've enjoyed listening since my childhood... Although this piece is not exactly in jazz or bebop style, I just tried to express in music my feeling after listening to lots of music from Charlie Parker, Dizzie Gillespie, etc... Also, the score is in C but I'd like to make part scores too after getting done with full score version... Thanks so much for your help! Edward