Leaderboard

Hello there! Here is the latest installment of preludes, no.16. This one deals with a lot of two voice counterpoint and a relentless ramble on one theme. As a personal side note, these have been a lot of fun to write, and it's been great simultaneously writing a bunch at once. I had a sporadic burst of ideas when I started this one, and it lead to a lot of spread out writing. I guess what I'm SAYIN' is... more to come! :D Thanks for listening and reading... any comments of any kind are welcome! P.S. some of those tempo markings are to mimic rubato, dunno I suck as an editor Prelude No 16.mp3 Prelude No 16 - Score.pdf

From the eyes of a pianist: One thing I feel you have not considered in your orchestration is the fact pianos have a sustain pedal. One thing clearly lacking is the sense of prolonged chords over an active line. In the video you linked, it has the pedal markings in place, so you can reference where Price does that. This is another key reason why your orchestration sounds empty. How to orchestrate this? As one example, I am going to link this video by Alex Heppelmann: https://youtu.be/sTZCFa7B6BA?si=vI-hAEGclgkSde-V Disclaimer, it is 27 minutes long, however, it's very thorough describing how to take a piano melody and use the orchestra to create some ideas of a piano sustain pedal. In my personal style, I will use the horns to sustain the harmony on long tones, while the strings pulse the harmony similar to what a piano score would do. If not this, I would swap the roles. The melody in this case, would be featured in woodwinds, another instrument family, or lead/solo instrument. Good luck to you and if you want to see some sample notation, let us know! This Fantasie is a very wonderful piece and I find it is so conversational. It really feels like an orchestra notated in the piano and in my opinion is an excellent piece to showcase the capabilities of the piano and a performer.

Written for the 2026 spring Young composer competition this work for percussion quintet features a wide range of natural and man-made percussion instruments to represent the integration of man and nature. Few years back me, and a few of my friends decided that it would be a good idea to cure our boredom by bringing a already busted up child size guitar meant for learning and to "" sacrifice it into the woods.'' the reservoir is a large body of water near where I live so it was a short distance, which then led to an easy walk into a bunch of colonial ruins where we laid the guitar and watch it rot away. Far deep in the reservoir lays a broken destroyed child size guitar that my sister got for her birthday as a child or something like that it’s been ever since sitting around around in the house and had transfer locations from her room to the living room room to the my room to the wilderness it’s final resting place. My sister never had been fond of performing music in her life. In fact she is quite horrible at it so my parents smartly in intelligently got her a low quality guitar anyways fast-forward a few years later, and I am now experimenting with multi instrumelity. However, though I got fond of extended techniques, playing it like a hammered dulcimer and even bowing the thing after me becoming friends with the lead guitarist to my modern day chamber band sort of situation, he starts to play it and at that point it only had two remaining strings. We all anonymously decided that we should bring it to the reservoir maybe hide a secret note in it after all the band was just a bunch of board teens, wanting something interesting to do with our lives, so what ended up happening was we snuck into the Reservoir found a foundation of an old colonial house and threw the guitar in it other than impact damage ever since the guitar has been rotting away however, though quite often me and my friends still visit it’s resting place only to see it in more final pieces I’m pretty sure I got rid of the note since it had some secrets that I do not want people finding and still to this day. It’s been resting there ever since. Percussion five has a lot of handmade instrument specifically for this work . The alcoholics shekere; is just a bucket with crushed up beer, cans, or soda cans is meant to be played in a similar style to a traditional shekere . the facidrum; faci- Latin for bundle, a bundle of resident sticks attached and tied up to a frame . Chopping block; a semi resonant piece of wood meant to be played like a table and a practice pad All of the other instruments should be self-explanatory Keep note that since because this was written in musescore bunch of playback loopholes has been exploited, although that there are more than five staves these are to represent each instrument in the set up rather than the actual part parts of represented by the groups that are bracketed. This is to create custom percussion set ups, and to satisfy an easier workflow with sound fonts. ' Sacrificed to the wilderness.mp3 Sacrificed to the wilderness.pdf

Hallo @Thatguy v2.0, this prelude is a piece I very loved and I wish I had composed it! 😀 It opens with a subject that – at the first glance – seems to be Baroque-like but introduces strong chromaticism in its second half, so that in mm. 5, when the second voice enters, it reminds me of Bach’s B minor fugue from the WTC I (BWV 869b). But now, in mm. 9, comes the surprise. The mood changes to a more „romantic“ feeling with the arpeggios. And that unexpected change now reminds me at numerous preludes (or fugues) from Shostakovich’s op. 87. I didn’t make an in-depth analysis, but I can see how you have constantly took benefit from using the initial thematic material, which for me emphasizes the effectiveness of counterpuntal technique. Even if I did not recognize more complete entries of the initial subject, I have the feeling that motifs from it recur, even sometimes in augmentation. I enjoyed your effort on articulation, including the pedalling and the rubato, and also the key signature change to Bb minor (or is it Db major?). All in all, a piece very much to my taste. Full of counterpoint, but not in the “Neo-Baroque” style, rather with contemporary harmonies and dissonances and a slight touch of Romanticism! By the way, I’m very curious to know how you’re organizing your preludes (since this is No. 16). Is it a complete cycle based on 16 of the 24 keys? I’m really looking forward to hearing more of them—and have I perhaps already missed one?

Hi @BlackkBeethoven The first PDF file that you've uploaded doesn't seem to be working, so I have to pause the YT video to compare your score to the original piece. I think you've chosen a very difficult piano piece to orchestrate. I am assuming it was your choice to orchestrate whatever piano piece you wanted since you say you like Florence Price so much. I could say more about your choice given that you knew you only had 4 minutes to work with and the piece is over 7 minutes long - but it's too late to bother about that now. This piece is difficult to orchestrate because of the many florid fioraturas/roulades that it contains. But there are things you could do to facilitate them throughout the orchestra. First, since the fioraturas in the beginning go all the way from the very high range to the moderately low, I would have made sure to give those to the strings since they have a more homogeneous sound throughout their range. So I'm surprised to see that you have just the Flutes/Piccolo on that part - that part is very thinly scored and isn't utilizing the full body of the orchestra. If I had my way with that part I would have given it to the woodwinds and the strings doubling each other + harp. I'm guessing you don't have harp. You've retained the piano staff in this score even though the piano doesn't play anything. I don't think you should have the piano play anything in this orchestration because it would most likely serve as a crutch to fill in holes that your orchestration should fill. Speaking of holes - in measure 6 you have the trombone start the low melody but then it's not continued for some reason. You score the melody more fully without fragmentation in measures 8 - 9. Throughout this whole introduction you really underuse the strings and I think for that reason the piece doesn't sound fully scored. Those are just my first impressions of the introduction of the piece. Good luck in your final and thanks for sharing!

Dipping my toes back in music composition after a hiatus. Last year, I wrote this piece in honor of the Detroit Medical Orchestra. This orchestra comprises volunteer musicians from the medical profession in the metro Detroit area, including doctors, nurses, dentists, medical students, and more. Their mission is to bring healing through music, and they perform free concerts throughout the region to achieve this goal. I’ve been a part of this wonderful orchestra for many years, and I wrote this piece to celebrate its 15th anniversary. This piece is somewhat an unofficial sequel to the very first piece I posted here on this website, as it continues to explore Greek mythology. (https://www.youngcomposers.com/t34170/nocturne-for-orchestra-an-ode-to-nyx-goddess-of-night/#comment-1186668533) More information of the piece can be found in the short program notes in the PDF score. The Detroit Medical Orchestra had the opportunity to perform this at a local hospital. I'm linking the performance here, as well as providing the audio MIDI mockup. Any comments/feedback is highly appreciated :) Asclepius.mp3 An Ode to Ascelpius, God of Medicine and Healing - Full score.pdf

Hiihiiii!!! This is my submission for the Spring 2026 Landscapes Competition :) For my landscape, I've chosen the mountains of Zhangjiajie, China. The first time that I saw these mountains, I was awestruck by just the sheer scale of them. Massive peaks and towers, overgrown with centuries-old moss, reaching beyond the clouds. Really just gorgeous. I wanted to try to write about them. The piece starts off zoomed outwards, depicting the sparseness of the clouds, until eventually, a melody begins to creep towards the first real theme--which I call the garden theme. The focus is on the garden now, zoomed in, it's a sort of natural oasis along the side of one of the tall mountainous pillar. It's beautiful, lush, full, until the garden begins to die as winter comes. The harmony because sparse and vague again, with large spontaneous gusts of wind... just very dry sounding overall. That is, until months later, the clouds darken, promising a heavy storm. Anticipation builds, until eventually, rain comes pouring down, so densely that it's almost like a wall. It's the first rain of spring!!! After the rain settles down, the garden comes to life again with the re-entry of the garden theme!! The piece ends as the focus zooms back out onto the clouds, and the tension finally resolves again. My goal with the piece was to try to represent the life cycle of the plant life out in the setting of Zhangjiajie. I hope you all like it !!!! AmidstTheCloudsAndFlowers.mp3 AmidstTheCloudsAndFlowers.pdf

Hi! I'm Harry Wood. I'm new to this forum and all things music honestly. I'm 30 years old, discovered piano a year ago and fell in love. I have no musical background, I've never played an instrument prior to this and I'm still learning how to read sheet music. I'm going for my grade 1 in piano later this year I hope. Started writing my own music 3 months ago as a way to express myself and my emotions, I'm very into neo classical artists such as Ludovico. I am struggling to know what to actually do with the pieces I have written. I think it sounds okay but I struggle to find people to show to see what others think of it. Below you can find 2 audio clips of my latest piano compositions, neither are finished and I will continue to work on them but I would love some feedback and opinions no matter how harsh it may be. I have fallen in love with writing music and I want to get better and that will only happen through honest feedback so please feel free to express your opinions and I will take it all on board. Kind Regards Harry. Far From Everything Far From Everything.mp3 As I am As I am.mp3

Hallo @HarryWood ! First of all, a warm welcome here at the YoungComposers Forum! Here are you among numerous music enthusiasts of a huge variety concerning their styles, compositional approaches and skills, so that I think, you’ll get the desired feedback. I was curious about what to expect about the style of your music, since you’ve called you a „new neo classical“ piano composer. The term „classical“ reminds me first to Beethoven or Mozart and „neo“ means for me to integrate more contemporary harmony and tonality. After listening to your pieces, they remind me more of Beethoven’s „Für Elise“, Richard Clayderman’s „Ballade Pour Adeline“ or „Comptine d'un autre ete – l'apres-midi“ from the French movie „Amelie“. Although all that pieces are very popular, that kind of genre is – as mentioned already by @Luis Hernández – somewhat too soft and non-exciting for me, too. Please don’t misunderstand that as a criticism on your person or your achievements in piano playing for about one year. The pieces sound good and have a calm mood, but putting some more ingredients in them would make them more unique: Whenever I think about what a good piece requires, the following things come to my mind: • First, a piece needs an idea how it could sound like, what mood it should have or which other pieces could be used as an inspiration (I think, that „ingredient“ you have already achieved with your pieces). • What a piece makes unique or captivating is a clever idea, creating a „unique selling point“, bringing some surprise to the listener. That is the „spice“ of the unexpected, for example a distinct harmony progression, an unexpected tonality or dissonances or a rhythmic surprise such as an unconventional meter (so I could imagine for your pieces a kind of Jazz harmony or somewhat more dissonant harmonies). • Another important thing is to think about the form of the piece. While this is a more theoretical topic, one sometimes has a good melodic idea (or even a number of), but the question is, how to put them together. So now the reflection comes, what the piece could be structurally, a simple A-B-A form, a rondo, in sonata form, a number of variations about the main theme? • A final question could be: In which context should the piece appear? I could imagine, that it is more satisfying to have an idea or „project“ of multiple pieces to be put together, for example, in a cycle such as „Six preludes“ or something like that. With such a framework in mind, you don’t run the risk of trying to create numerous unrelated pieces and perhaps putting them „unfinished“ away. The incentive „Now have I finished number four of six“ helps yourself to focus and you’ll see, nearly every piece is worth it to be retained. Looking around here at the forum would be a perfect place to get inspiration and don’t hesitate to „review“ other compositions too, even if they are from „more experienced“ composers. Every reply is welcome and receiving the „incentives“ (such as points, badges and finally ranks) does not primarily depend on the quality and quantity of the compositions you shared, but even more from the amount of feedback you’ve given. And, by the way, if you share your scores, too, the reviewers would be able to give more in-depth reply, for example also concerning the „art“ of score engraving. Friendly regards. Wieland

I really enjoyed this! I think you capture the "voice" of Schoenberg that he has in most of his orchestral works. I said this in a previous review, but orchestration is really subjective....so here are my suggestions: First piece I think the oboe is suppose to be piano as well (it's not marked in the score). I also think the pickup Trumpet run can be transferred to the clarinet I don't think the 1st trombone needs to double the cello/horn in the 4th bar. In measure 7, unless the orchestra has 5 timpani drums (or an EXTREMELY good player who can quickly adjust tuning) that is going to be difficult In measure 8, that trumpet part looks questionable...that 32nd note might be messy In bars 13-14, probably could combine the cello/bass part to be played by divided cello....helps with thinning out the sound since it's marked p Generally, it's really hard for brass players to play pp or ppp when there is a moving/active part with leaps. I would give the trombone/tuba part to a bass clarinet and/or bassoon near the end. Second piece I would've used bassoons instead of horn in the 2nd measure. They sound more "dry" staccato and will blend with the pizzicato I'm assuming "ord" means Arco? make that clear in the string parts Trombones don't usually read in treble clef. I would change that to a tenor clef in the last measure. Third piece I would just have the tuba play without doubling from trombone. The passage is already pp and tuba has a more rounder sound for that I think the pppp markings are a bit much Fourth piece Measure 10: that bassoon/trumpet figure is going to be very tricky to play in unison. I would just have trumpet play it (even though it would be a challenge) Fifth piece From how it's written in the score, it looks you only want half of the 2nd violin section play measures 8-11? Sixth piece There is a lot of pp and ppp in here...but a lot of instrument doubling - for example bars 5-6 cello/bass doubling bass trombone/tuba AND all bass instruments the last measure. I would do mutes for all strings and brass in this piece. Maybe even solo strings to reduce the sound. The last two eight notes could easily be just a single bass player doing pizzicato

Hallo @luderart as you frequently present compositions in this style—short, aphoristic pieces for solo instruments—your compositional approach differs from that of most other members of the forum, who often attempt to write full-scale symphonic works for a large orchestra. Yet in an orchestra, an instrument is merely a gear in a large clockwork mechanism and is subject to the conductor’s interpretive intent. On the other hand, dedicated solo pieces for monodic instruments seem to be rare, so that I could imagine that they are appreciated by players of the clarinet, bassoon etc. However, when I listen to them and look at the score, I sense a kind of loneliness (which is not a criticism, but merely a statement of fact): The solo instrument „utters“ its sentence, yet no conversation emerges, as there is no accompanying or contrasting voice. And even the score pages look a bit „lonely“, since there is remaining whitespace due to the need of only one staff for notation ... Here is another, similar approach to a piece for a solo instrument, the bassoon. The composer, in that case, decided to put the „sentences“ in a more programmatic context, depicting „a garden“ over the course of a year. https://youtu.be/ok_R4cstdGs Now, some short thoughts to the individual sententiae: No. 1 It serves as an overture, trying to gain the attention of the listener. The meter change from 6/4 to 5/4 in bar two is somewhat surprising, and, together with the two trills, reminds me of the bells ringing in the lobby of a concert hall, urging the audience to take their seats before the playful quintuplet melody begins. No. 2 A short, playful piece - reminding me at children playing around. No. 3 To me, the third sentence has a melancholic and contemplative character, which is only seemingly lightened by the eighth-note runs. The final question remains unanswered. No.4 The fourth one has a quality that even exceeds the character of a „sentence only“. Because it consists of three clearly perceptible motifs, which are used in sequences, it has enough thematic material, so that it could be developed further or used as a sketch for a much larger piece, too. No. 5 Again, a sententia which is a short piece of its own, now in A-B-A form, yielding a small exposition, a development and a recapitulation. (Fun fact for me is bar 11. in 1/4 meter with the sole purpose to place a rest ...) No. 6 Number six for me expresses the idea behind the „sententiae“ as its best: Although it has a simple texture with only staccato semiquavers, the rests at the end of the phrases serve as the period at the end of a sentence, thus structuring the short utterance. No. 7 With number seven – which also bears thematic material which could be developed further -, we come back to a more melancholic mood, somewhat a recapitulation of sententia number 3.

Hi to all, This week I decided to revise and extend my orchestration of Ravel's piano menuet in C# minor. The original is very short, and I thought a longer orchestration would work better. Haven't put the slurs in yet, as it's still a work in progress. Hope you enjoy! (P.S. If anyone knows an orchestra who might like to perform this, do let me know! I have several other companion works that would go nicely with it.) Menuet in C sharp minor (Ravel orchestration) #18 (midi).mp3 Menuet in C sharp minor (Ravel orchestration) #18 (score) #5.pdf

Hey there Weiland! Thanks for checking this out, it always means a lot to hear great feedback. ❤️ Thank you, friend. I'm acutely aware of the style of each of these preludes, as I'm constantly thinking about the overall feel with each one, wanting them to possess their own unique character. One of my weaknesses as a composer has been counterpoint, or at least using it in the foreground versus just thinking about it with melody and harmony. I've posted the previous preludes on the forum (check the topics tab in my profile, I'm lucky enough to have @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu give his interpretations), and a style they lack was one that focused on a more contrapuntal foundation. Personal challenge accepted. 😄 I'll also say that it makes me bashful to hear you enjoyed the counterpoint, as your talent with it is drenched in the music I've heard of yours. I wrote the first twelve a few years ago, with the intention of having each one focused on a different tonal center. The scales and approaches used varied a ton, at least that was the intention. There's blues, Chopinesque ones, soliloquys, video game character adaptations, etc. These next twelve started differently. I'm varying the tone centers, but maybe I repeat some here and there. Not sure yet, but the restriction this time is I'm limited to the 61 keys on the keyboard I'm using to brainstorm and workout things. Thanks for listening and sharing your thoughts, it means a lot!

This is a good attempt! Some thoughts: Probably just omit the piccolo and have a 2nd flute player double 29-32 with the 1st flute...or just omit the 2nd flute/piccolo all together Same thing with the 2nd clarinet. I would have 2 players, with the 2nd doubling on Bb and bass clarinet. Quirky (mostly unusual) thing I noticed is that you have the 2nd instrument plays higher range/melodic material than the first. For example Trumpet 2 plays the melody (with the higher range) in measure 14-20. Same thing in clarinets and bassoons around measure 33. Nothing wrong with it...just unusual. Brass scoring a little awkward. I personally would take out trombones and tuba, and maybe the 2nd trumpet away as well. I would've had both horns play the parts you have for Horn 2 and Trumpet 1, with the melody solely with 1 trumpet player in measure 14 onward Not a fan of the glockenspiel in bar 14. I think that counter-line can be played better with the harp and oboe combination instead of the harp doubling the trumpet Nit-picky, but I would also have the basses do a pizzicato in 11 and 13. I would also have the cellos do pizzicato in measure 14 until the pickup to 18. I personally would also double the cello line octave lower in the bass to broaden the depth of sound (this is probably not written in the original score, but would be a nice orchestration effect). The material reoccurring in 21 can be scored differently than what came before in 10. I would have the melody in maybe oboe or English horn...or maybe French horn, with the harmony in clarinet, bassoon and/or horns. The bassoon doubling at bar 30 seems a bit much, maybe divide in octaves? I would not have bass clarinet playing there. I would also have the harp strum out the chords (or arpeggiate them somehow) the last couple of bars Scoring in general from 28-31 is a bit awkward In general, I think more care to the dynamic markings might also be good. I think I know why you did them (probably because of the audio mockup)...but just looks odd when there randomly fff in the passage where I think its suppose to be just f or mf. I also disagree about the use of "extended techniques" in this piece. The most I would do is maybe have the strings muted.

I'm not minding being spammed! I didn't have time to participate in the thread, but it's still informative. You obviously know what you are doing! Maybe I'll talk with you if I ever get away from the piano and chamber music and get to some orchestration...

In my opinion, when the main theme starts, it should be in the trumpet. That spiritual style longs for a trumpet lead and if I were to continue the arrangement, I’d start in the trumpet versus woodwinds. Sort of, in a sultry way. With picking a spot to end, why try to tackle the whole piece? You experienced how the first reading session went. It’ll probably be under tempo, so pick a spot where the phrase feels conclusive. In my opinion, about one-minute, thirty seven seconds in (1:37 from the beginning) of the video, Price does a deceptive cadence in the third measure of the system. Instead, make it a PAC and resolve the piece before it goes into the developmental section. This is one suggestion and you can find more spots like this later in the work as more alternatives. So, you have options to pick from.

Yes, I do: Keep the melody intact. As pianists, we often find that composers embellish around the melody with active passages, sometimes played between both hands and sometimes only in one hand. However, with the orchestra you have a lot more diversity when it comes to sustaining a melodic line and dispersing the accompaniment. So, as one suggestion, pick and choose where to keep the melody intact. Next, inform yourself of the piece. Florence Price did not come up with the melody. The whole piece is centered around the spiritual "Sinner, Please Don't Let This Harvest Pass". The term Fantasie implies that it is her sense of improvisation. The whole piece can be translated at the "Negro Fantasy" or "Negro Improvisation." This is important as you'll have to pick your battles. You may not be able to write a passage exactly how it's notated on the piano part, but instead, simplify and keep the idea or gesture intact for the orchestra. I did this in my version at measure 6. I was prioritizing the beat and flow of the melody versus the fancy arpeggio. Lastly, keep the meter simple; change it when the piano version does. The orchestra is not a solo pianist and it's better to keep the meter/ time signature the same as overall score. This may add some concessions when you do. One example in my version is the first arpeggio. Instead of making it fit into the one bar as Price did, I noticed that the arpeggios were grouped in sevens. Thus, I decided to write it out and make it explicit. It added a few measures, but when someone simply hears it, they may not feel the difference. When you look at my score, everything feels clean, and makes sense rhythmically. It's a benefit of keeping the meter related to the original.

About 3 years or so, on and off. Started with my own works; but in the last few months I began orchestrating lesser known pieces by famous composers.

Okay, it's time: I only did the introduction as this is not my project lol. The main thing you'll notice is how I prolonged pitches in the instruments compared to what the piano score looks like. This is how I was able to write a piano sustain pedal in this case. I am unsure if I would change anything, however, I spent only an hour on this and would probably mess around with it if I had more time. Attached is a Transposed score, Concert-pitch score and an MP3 audio. (Use the C-score to compare to the piano and transposed score for the parts) Orch-F.Price_FantasieNegre.mp3 Fantasie_Negre_Excerpt_C-score.pdf Fantasie_Negre_Excerpt_Transposed.pdf

i love the texture in this. its very subtle but it goes really well with your description! it is imaginative in a way that i could visualize the imagery. for example the gusts of winds starting on b.28 using the dynamics, or the rain on b.52. the beginning usages of harmonics to represent the clouds and the subsequent ones are also pretty cool the string writings are lovely in my opinion, in the way that you took advantage of the different individual string timbres of the quartet. those low C string cello notes are powerful and prominent, especially on b.48 where, i think, it indicates the start of the "wall of rain" section contrasting the high register notes of the preceding section and finally, im fond of the way you use the variety of dissonances and added notes, it feels very effective and not over bearing that you're drowning in a chromatic porridge Melodies Themes Motives 5 Harmony Chords Textures 9 Form Development Structure Time 10 Originality Creativity 10 Score Presentation 10 Instrumentation Orchestration Playability 7 Execution of Given Challenge 10 Taste 9 Average Score: 8.75 final note: its peak.

Hi Sam Yes message any Vocals over to personal messenger, and ill add them to the mix, youll be surprised ! But please Sam .......Nows the time to stop smoking. xxx To Finalize this Subject : The Body converts Nicotine into Acrylamide via the URINE. 1:That's why female smokers develop "Ovarian Cancer" 2: That's why male smokers develop "Prostate Cancer" The body also converts Nicotine into Formaldehyde via the Stomach & Brain which is a kind of "Burning Acid"................linked to Internal Bleeding. But don't worry..........All Hospitals have a "Cold-Storage-Mortuary" should anything go wrong , with the next operation.

Hello @Luis Hernández ! I’m not able to write a „review“ today since therefore I would like to explore the six little piano pieces in more depth in its original version to compare them with your orchestration. So for now, all I can say is that I really enjoyed them and consider them good examples of orchestration—especially for someone like me who has no experience yet. The great thing about them is that the pieces are so short yet still expressive—so there should be no excuse not to go even deeper into the details (if the time allows me). Now, somewhat off-topic: Two days ago, I attended a performance of Dvořák’s “Stabat Mater” with a full orchestra and a massive choir (430 singers). This was a real fun, not only because of the bombastic sound, but also because I was able to follow Dvořák’s orchestration live. It is the total contrast to the „six little piano pieces“, since he stays very long on the harmonies and even single tones – letting them „rotate“ through the entire orchestra. At one point, you hear and see the cellos playing a chord while the double basses accompany them with pizzicato. A moment later, you can still hear the chord, but you see that the cellos have stopped playing, and after a moment of surprise, you realize that the horns have taken over and the pizzicato has been reinforced by the timpani. Yet the transition was so seamless that you didn’t even notice the change in instruments, only a slight shift in timbre. And by the way, the first movement of the “Stabat Mater” begins with exactly one note being played for nine measures, passing through all the instruments before the main theme begins. That reminded me of one of your recent posts: “What can I do with two notes?” 🙂

Hi Danish, Really like your orchestration here. Interesting choice in Bar 85, where your piccolo is pitched below the flutes. I think in Bar 9, where you have two harp harmonics played together, you technically should have two harmonic circle symbols on top of each other above the staff. I wonder how you define the difference between vertical and horizontal accents? (The conductor I work with, advised me not to use the vertical ones, as he thought their meaning was ambiguous.) Also, how do sfz and sffz differ from an accent?

Hello, About six years ago, I orchestrated Schönberg’s Six Little Pieces for Piano. I only uploaded one of them to the “Writer’s Block and Suggestions…” section, since I wasn’t quite sure what I was doing. Now I know a little more about orchestration and how to approach different styles. So I’d like to share the orchestrated version of all six pieces. Thank you. Best regards. Schoenberg.mp3 Schoenberg.pdf

Those are very different things. If I buy a hydraulic press and use it to flatten a stainless steel pipe, obviously I'm morally responsible for flattening the pipe. If that pipe belonged to someone else, I can hardly evade responsibility by saying, "Hey, it wasn't me! It was the hydraulic press!" On the other hand, it's equally obvious that I can't lay claim to flattening the pipe as a feat of strength. If I cry, "Behold my strength!" as I hold the flattened piece of steel aloft, I am quite rightly met with, "Uh... you didn't do that. The hydraulic press did."

Nobodies reviews are more "official" than anyone else's and you're free to review whichever entries you want and in any manner you see fit (you can use the official competition reviewing template or review them any way you want or use your own template). The winners will be decided by popular voting polls.

This is my "Seven Sententiae for Clarinet, Op. 395". It is one of my most ambitious set of sententiae both in overall length and individual sententiae. It is also one of my greatest compositions for a monodic instrument. I hope that you enjoy listening to it and would welcome your feedback. Seven Sententiae for Clarinet, Op. 395.mp3 Seven Sententiae for Clarinet, Op. 395.pdf

Haha, I was just curious whether you would notice that and even ask about! Yes, in fact the composer Thomas Handke is my brother. One could perhaps put the bars 11 and 12 together changing its time signature to 7/4 with a starting quarter rest. But I understand, that you would not like it, since the rhythmic recapitulation of the first bar would be changed with this leading rest. The “overly correct” version might be to write measure 10 twice using “volta brackets,” with version 1 remaining unchanged and version 2 changed to 5/4 with a closing quarter rest, so that the rest would appear at the end of the phrase as intended. However, there is no problem with the single bar in ¼ meter. The only thing which „bothered“ me was that the „whole bar rest“ – while being correctly - looks at the first glance like a „whole note rest“ which obviously does not fit in a bar of ¼. Thus, the simplest solution could be to change that rest to a quarter rest in mm. 11.

E.A.S. | Electronic Ambient Space ELECTRONIC AMBIENT SPACE.mp3

Not a specific note for your piece, but when it comes to orchestrating piano pieces, the gold standard is Ravel. I would highly recommend studying his orchestration of Mussorgsky’s Picture At An Exhibition, along with his orchestration of his pieces like Ma Mere l’Oyle and Le Tombeau de Couperin. I would also give a listen to Brahams Haydn Variations, in both the double piano and orchestral versions. One thing you’ll note about these works, is how they weren’t limited by the notes on the page. As an orchestrator you are not just transferring notes from one instrument to another. You are interpreting the music through your own sound.

Thanks Wieland Handke for your review of my piece and your impressions about each sententia often amounting to a detailed review of it. Indeed I also consider the sixth one to be the best realization of the “sententia” form as well as perhaps the best of this set. Regarding the link of the composer Thomas Handke that you mention, I wonder whether he is related to you as he has the same surname. I listened to his “Partita für Fagott solo, op. 33” and enjoyed it. It is also performed well by the performer. Thanks for the link! I have only composed one solo piece for fagott which is the bassoon in English, and consider it an instrument with a voice full of feeling. Regarding the 11th measure of Sententia No. 5 in ¼ and with only a rest, it was done for practicality since otherwise the repeat sign would have to be made in the middle of the bar (in case I changed it to 5/4), a practice which I have the impression is not desirable if not incorrect. Or I would have had to write out a new bar as a separate continuation of the repeat.

Hi everyone! This is my sonata for piano and alto saxophone, which I composed over this summer as a birthday gift for my mom (born on Halloween!) Below you'll find my own formal analysis of the work to help parse a piece that even I find a little bit dense. The analysis will focus on the most complex movement, the third, so if a more thorough explanation of the first two movements is wanted I'll edit this post to include theme here. Please bear in mind that there are passages in this piece which are meant to be played completely freely from a rhythmic standpoint, and MIDI simply can't simulate that. Thank you for listening and providing your thoughts on this piece, it's something I spent a lot of time and energy on. Analysis: My Sonata for Piano and Saxophone in Eb major is cast in three movements. The last two are played without a break. The first movement is in a free form based on tempo transformation. (It’s essentially the form of the third movement of Brahms’ second symphony). The second movement, Romanza, is a simple, ternary form in Bb with an F minor middle section. It’s very beautiful but harmonically slightly troubled, somewhat unstable. The movement plays without a break into the third. The third movement is in a freely reworked version of sonata form. There is a slow, dramatic introduction for the piano alone which moves through various keys from F# minor to Eb major. Then follows “Cavatina I” a ternary form subsection. The A section of this is a pastoral tune in Ab minor over a pedal Ab. This then gives way to the B section, a modally ambiguous march. Then the A section returns. This gives way to “Fuga I” which is a fugue in Gb major over a Db pedal point (lasting almost the entire three and a half minute long fugue). This fugue is more dramatic than rhetorical, climaxing with an episode in Gb minor which is subverted into “Cavatina II”. This is the same music as Cavatina I, but formally inverted (the A section becomes the B section and vice versa). The march is heard in a more ornamental form for the piano alone. Then the pastoral tune, this time in Gb major over a pedal fifth in the bass of the piano. The march returns and leads directly into “Fuga II” This fugue uses as its subject a transformed version of the subject of Fuga I, itself a transformation and combination of the first movement’s “seed motive” (Eb - C - G - Bb - F - Eb) and the pastoral tune. This fugue is highly metrically complex, representing a transition and conflict between the considerable amount of 6/8 music, and the common time of the section that follows. The final passage of the finale is a chorale. The chorale introduces new melodic material (actually built from intervalic material from the introduction, which is a transformation of the first movement seed motive), but the harmony under it was carefully constructed: the entire finale is an elaboration on the harmonic progression (F# minor - D# diminished - Ab minor - Eb minor - Gb major - Bb minor - Eb major) heard in the introduction of the movement. The chorale is just another restatement of that harmonic progression, reaffirming the journey back to Eb major for the third time in the movement. The chorale-coda also gradually introduces a new rhythmic cell which crystallizes over the course of the passage, resulting in the final Eb major chords of the movement being sounded in the following rhythm: eighth note - dotted quarter - half note - dotted quarter - eighth note (- half note). This is a rhythmic palindrome, mirroring the harmonic palindrome which comprises the structure of the sonata as a whole.

Hey, thanks! Thanks for your insight! I especially appreciate that you picked up on the rhythmic aspect of the whole piece, one of the things I really wanted to explore while writing it was finding ways to embed rhythmic construction in the form, and I think I found some interesting ways to do that here.

Not sure how I missed this, I like it, and nice to hear an alto sax sonata!

I kinda prefer the new version :) Orchestration is pretty subjective so thank you for experimenting with my suggestions! I think you can remove the pizzicato in the bass in bars 15-17 (just have celli play).

Had a go at implementing some of these ideas below. Not sure about the pizz. in the celli and basses. It's an interesting effect; just maybe feels too aggressive for the material? Decided to keep the trombones and tuba for now, because I'd prefer to use the full brass section. (The score attached is for midi rendition only: so hasn't been tidied.) Menuet in C sharp minor (Ravel orchestration) #20 (midi).mp3 Menuet in C sharp minor (Ravel orchestration) #20 (midi).pdf

They are college musicians (most are music majors), but some key players like the oboist and some of the strings are people taking the class as an elective. And this was a sight-reading session our orchestration class does in collaboration with the orchestra. Our final project is to orchestrate a piano piece and then we do (2) reading sessions with the orchestra. One with the rough draft (what I've posted), and then the final session (this coming Wednesday), with our revisions.

Thanks for checking, but everything looks normal on my end. If anyone else is experiencing issues with this forum though, let me know.

lol, trust me when I say I am still learning every day. I am not that good compared to career composers or even some dedicated composition majors. Point is, it doesn’t matter. You are at a pivotal point in your journey and whether or not you think you’re good now, those thoughts won’t matter when you see your works on the big stage in a few years. For me, I am hungry for knowledge and consume information like a computer. I love music with my whole being and will only put my best in when exercising it. To add, maybe a DM would be better so we stop spamming the notifications of other users on this thread lol

@BlackkBeethoven Decided to look at it more in-depth: B. Beethoven - Fantaise Orchestration (ANNOTATED).pdf

So we have progress!! Fantasie Negre - ORCHESTRATION FINAL.pdf -- score starts at 0:25 in the video In the above screenshot from the score video, in that last measure, there is a V7 (6-5 sus.)...on the copy I was using, there is an error (G is held), and I kind of liked that sound for the orchestration, so I'm going to keep it as is. In my original orchestration, I liked some of the sounds/fullness I was getting at around 0:32, 0:48-1:02, 2:17-2:23, which I tried to maintain, but I also did a look at my score and saw where I had really clean drop-offs between players/parts, so that is my main concern. That and keeping the fullness going between parts, and that sustained pedal sound. I'm at 0:48 in the video so far in my edits. Let me know how I did! Thanks again for all the feedback!

Of course there are those great organ sonatas, but this is like something he would have improvised in church.

Nope. Just stumbled upon it in NF and it was really good, so this thread was just me shilling someone else's work!

Same here!

Nice. I found a sneaky way to transfer from Bb minor to B major.

Just looking for general feedback on a less adventurous work before I dive into a more involved work. I feel like advice on the use of harmony and motifs would improve most of my work, and I could develop those skills by learning to improve some of my existing work. Waltz in Eb.mp3

Hi everyone! I'm currently working on a 4 movement Piano Sonata in E minor, and I've already written the first movement, at around a little over 10 minutes in length alone. Im 15 years old, and although I'm a classically trained pianist studying at the peabody preparatory, I'm a self taught composer, so I'd appreciate any feedback on notation, structure, and really anything else that could benefit the piece, which could help me refine further. The piece is in sonata form, with the A and B themes in the exposition both lasting from m.1-163 (A - m.1-82, B - m.83-163), a development section (with a brief 24 measure Fugato on the main theme from m.21-37) lasting from m.164-219, and then the recap from m.220-293. The piece goes through many modulations, occasional complex polyrhythms, chromaticism, complex late-romantic/impressionist harmonies, cross-staff textures, delayed resolutions, distant key relationships, using "deceptive" major keys, and it ends the exposition in B major, the dominant, rather than G major the relative major. The development begins with the fugato in D# minor, and then after going through A# minor, G# minor, Ab major, breaking the fugato, and E major, it begins the recap back in E minor, moving through a few more keys to finally reach E major in the end. For this sonata, I'm very inspired by liszt (both his more virtuosic showpieces and his more introspective late works), especially with how he uses thematic development and combines "mephisto" drama with lyrical spirituality. In the beginning of my piece, you have the main motive of the entire piece, what I call the "B octave motive", since it's just octaves in both hands repeating the note B, but this single motive (both rhythmically and melodically) can be found in almost every section of the piece, from the tempestuous A theme, to the spiritual, watery and flowing B theme. The polar opposite contrast between the A and B themes creates both immense technical and musical demands for the performer, while still being idiomatic. Additionally, many of the ideas in this sonata, come from my own improvisations over the years, which I think helps give me a little bit of a distinct voice, but I'd like to know the perspectives of others. As I already mentioned, all feedback is appreciated! Note: the first link is me playing a slightly cut version of the exposition, and links 2 and 3 show me playing the parts I cut out from the first link. Links: https://youtu.be/MyptBsYMNiw https://youtube.com/shorts/-kIa8oVrUg4 https://youtube.com/shorts/_eLFRSilBzs https://youtube.com/shorts/_lOHz4Nz5qE https://youtu.be/qlEPGqwAq64 Piano Sonata in E Minor - Full Score.pdf

Thanks for posting @Sebastian Guzman ! It's been a while since I've listened to the Liszt B minor Sonata, but I am definitely getting vibes of it here (most assuredly from your B-octave motif). Your musical language in this work does feel very Lisztian to me, which is inclusive of the harmony and the piano textures, and that I mostly do mean as a compliment. I'm curious to know what other influences/inspirations you may have had while writing this movement though, as some sections do seem to draw from other wells of musical ideas (e.g. the harmonic movements in b. 91-105 felt distinctly modern to me). I confess that I am not really in a position to offer super helpful advice but I hope you'll find this useful anyway. I also don't mean any suggestion as an attack on your writing, of course, but as an exchange of ideas that you could optionally disregard :) Exposition The B-octave motif is very reminiscent of one of the motifs in the B minor Sonata, haha. I see that the majority of the dotted rhythm in this motif is the backbone for the rhythm of the A theme, if I am correct... I noticed in your trimmed-down video you seemed to have cut out b. 54-62 from the A theme and b. 105-118 from the B theme? Admittedly, I prefer the abridged version as I thought the material in question to be a little redundant, given that you do cover well and to great length both themes in the exposition. My thematic economy side of my brain would like to think that one should only state a theme until the listener is familiar enough with it to recognise said theme when it pops up in the development. If you wanted to keep said material for symmetry/form-related reasons/other personal preferences, though, by all means do so. I do love the B theme in all of its mellow sweetness, especially its first half. The second half of the B theme feels a bit static with the repeated notes, but coupled with the rolling left hand accompaniment, it does give a sense of floating/gliding, if that is what you desired. As I said, I quite like the harmony you move through in b. 91-105. A charming change in texture from b. 154 onwards! Development The fugato start of the development seems a bit dry? I can see where you are going with the material but I'm not super convinced by b. 164-187, though I suppose some pedal would help, or varying the articulation and texture a tad more even if a fugato. I didn't quite exactly get fugato vibes from it either, given how long the statement of the theme is. This is completely a suggestion, of course, and it is up to you as to how you'd like your sonata to work, but perhaps using only the first phrase of the theme (b. 164-166) and then building up a series of entries in other voices could be rather effective. I somewhat find this example to also be a bit dry, but I like the energy build-up of this fugato moment in the development of the fourth movement of Scriabin's Third Sonata, if you wanted something similar. Interesting, from b. 178 onwards in the fugato, you introduce another voice that is the B theme, or at least an echo of it, if I'm correct? I am a big fan of juxtaposing thematic material in the development sections of sonatas, if so... The material in b. 196-215 seems a bit overly virtuosic? I'm uncertain whether there might be some significance in the chords/harmonies you use here, but I think it'd be great to insert more of the existing thematic material in here, fragmented or whatnot. Overall, the development feels short to me, not in the least because I feel like you could've pulled out your compositional chops a bit more. Given the length of the exposition, I think this deserves a heftier development with varied treatment and inclusion of all three of the A and B themes and the B-octave motif. Trying to set the tempestuous A theme or the B-octave motif into the suave atmosphere/mood of the B theme, for example, or more chopping and changing, there are a wide variety of things you could do. Liszt can of course be a great source of ideas here! Recap Nice to restate the B-octave theme. Maybe the transition from the end of the development could be made smoother? I'm not sure though. I like the recasting of the textures in the recap of the A theme, but it feels a little airy? I'm not sure if you were going for that feel, and if you were, then I am in no place to complain. I suppose you could add some deep bass notes on the offbeats to give it a bit more body and hold them with your regular pedal, or see if the sostenuto pedal could work (though it could make the right hand arpeggios rather dry). I also appreciate the A theme being a bit shorter here... With b. 236 onwards and B theme, the energy seems to drop somewhat, with almost the exact statement of the original B theme but transposed. It is once again up to you, but you could also recap the B theme in a different texture, as you did with the A theme. I felt like the energy levels ought to have ramped up a bit more moving further and further down to match the energy of b. 282 onwards to the coda, possibly? At the moment, the ending feels mildly content with itself, though I would think the large chords and dynamics would suggest otherwise. With notation and formatting, I also admit I'm not the best person to offer advice, but there does seem to be the occasional odd things, e.g. whatever is stretching out b. 122 (the rest in the upper staff can also be removed there), the clipping of text at the end of the system at b. 248-250, and the slightly overzealous floating slur in b. 288. I've been told that with hairpins, it's best practice to state exactly which dynamic the hairpin starts and ends at, including double hairpins like < so >, but I am open to corrections. Yeah, that's most of what I have to offer with thoughts. Excellent playing, by the way, I almost forgot to mention! This already looks like a difficult sonata so far with this first movement and you interpreted it very pleasingly, at least to my ears, and in a very convincing way (though I suppose it is up to the composer yourself to decide whether it was served justice, lol).