Leaderboard

This dialog is pretty much correct I think. There's a difference between writing something abstract and writing something unidiomatic and needlessly difficult. Hiding behind supposed goals of abstraction and complexity to excuse bad writing is not an easily definable thing, but like pornography according to the Supreme Court, "you know it when you see it" if you are a relatively experienced composer. My use of harp is very sparing, but that's roughly in line with how it should be used. As Thomas Goss (of OrchestrationOnline) says: decoration, filigree, support. The harp is like dessert, adding great delicacy to a thin texture but rapidly becoming stale if overused. Every orchestration challenge he issues stipulates NO HARP CONCERTOS for a reason: beginner composers see the double staff and get overexcited about what they (think they) can give the harpist, and wildly overestimate the instrument's real capabilities. At the end of the day the harpist has an ungodly difficult part that just gets drowned or forgotten in the texture. Let the harp do what it does best. The harpist won't mind if they have to sit and count some rests any more than my poor trumpet players will. They're paid to do that, so to speak. Notice that some of the most idiomatic harp writing I employ comes in the come una danza sections where I use glissandi and rolled chords - two extremely common and standard harp techniques to just add some background lush flavor to the texture. The exact notes played, insofar as they make the right chords, aren't important. The most I have the harpist do in a foreground role throughout the entire piece is that little dainty rising scale in the reprise of the danza. Again, decoration, filigree, support. To the other point, this work is actually not drawing on minimalism at all. The glacial note values are an emotional expression tool, not an attempt to simplify or pare anything down. My contrapuntal lines are actually fairly intricate a lot of the time even when the note values are long and the textures are thin.

So anyway, the last time I tried to write a symphony was almost 8 years ago, and it was so terrible that it's now called Symphony No. 0 and we never speak of it. I was 15 at the time. I suppose (most) teenagers aren't generally known for writing great symphonies. But I recently tried again. This is now my Symphony No. 1. I just finished it today. It's in one vast, slow through-composed movement. I wonder if, as you listen, it is obvious who my main stylistic influences were. The entire piece is built from one motif, the three-note figure that bookends the whole thing of the rising leap followed by the falling step. I've been working on this for about six months. This symphony was the product of a lot of experimentation and often changing course on the fly. Not only have I never written this much slow music all at once before, but these are the largest orchestral forces I've ever handled, with the greatest variety of orchestral color at my disposal. It's also the first time in a while I have allowed myself the luxury of a harp, as previously I had always been wary of giving myself the opportunity to commit any of a number of common orchestration blunders. I'm enjoying the fruits of the new Muse Sounds I have gained access to by virtue of switching to Musescore. They're wonderful. They can be a bit buggy, but sometimes it's almost scary how human they sound. Curious about how this will be received.

Hey all! I just completed what was for me a massive project, Three Scenes for Ensemble is a set of chamber pieces (one of my first compositions) which I composed and recorded at the legendary Hansa Studios in Berlin. I felt this would be a great place to get some feedback. I know it's a ton of music, but it would be incredibly helpful to even if focus on one measure to show an example of different choices I could have made orchestration-wise, harmonically, notation-wise, etc... Thank you in advance and I hope you enjoy! If you would like to support please consider also listening on Spotify. Score Video: About the Music! Credits: Composer: Nicholas Schuman, Flute: Thomas Hahn, Oboe: Anna Schulkowski, Clarinet: Constance Morvan, French Horn: Melinda Gál, Piano: Daniel Zhao, Cello: Josiah Simonds, Sound Engineer: Arne Bergner, Assistant Engineer: Marian Hafenstein

Hi Henry! What an honor to have such a thorough and kind response, especially to my first post. I want you to know that it truly means a lot to me. Yeah, my themes are all over the place and as much as I wanted to make sense of it all, i still have much to learn about themes and development. Much of it came from the stress of a deadline (for school) and writing segmented sections which are later forced together. I love how you discussed it's 'aura' :). You gave me new confidence with this response and very useful criticism which I will learn from. I'm most definitely very excited to go check out and discuss music from other composers on this forum. Cheers! Nick Schuman

Are you sure your 12 distinct themes are complex and abstract or messy and absurd? Isn't the timbre of harp and strings pizz. different? Henry

Hi @Hcab5861, I really like how you change the harmony for the original Twinkle melody with a chorale usage of the melody! Although it’s a figured bass scoring, I would really wanna know the RH of the harpsichord (piano) too! Thx for sharing! Henry

A very well written orchestral piece, it's quite impressive how it all comes from one theme, yet it doesn't at all feel repetitive or monotonous. If my use of the harp was "horribly excessive", this goes to the opposite extreme - the harp pretty much doesn't exist at all. There are so few notes for the harp here that it begs the question: why not just drop the harp entirely and put those notes as pizzicato in the strings instead or something like that? Funnily enough, this seems to be in a way the exact opposite of my orchestral work. This appears more minimalist and even somewhat impressionist, while mine is complex and abstract with 12 distinct themes. Was this intentional or just a normal consequence of your usual style?