Leaderboard

A lighter composition for the early Summer, conceived as an exercise in harmonic development, apoggiaturas and chromatic saturation. Greatly inspired by Chopin's Op. 28 Prelude in E minor. YouTube video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwInFjwKJUo Romantic Prelude in A minor.mp3 Romantic Prelude in A minor.pdf

Hello! Interesting piece to have listened to. I must apologize now as I have some comments and in an effort to stay concise, I will be blunt. Here are my thoughts: (view on PC if able, not mobile) Double check the alignment of your diminuendos and crescendos. To me, it casts the illusion that the score is a little unpolished: With the slur groupings (two-note slurs), was it your intention to make it an ensemble feature? I saw some spots that have two-note slurs in one instrument, but not the others, even when the gestures feels the same: Measures 2 and 6 (in cello) as one example. Last thing would be dynamics themselves. If cello is the main feature, I think it a little asymmetrical to have the violin 1 be a dynamic marking louder than the melody. Shouldn't the cello be the loudest voice when presenting the melody? With the tempo markings, I think it looks better and easier to read when the text is a font size or two bigger or in bold. As a performer, it helps visually distinct the two text field types. Last few picky things would be measures 8,14 and 21. Why not just use a half rest for the other voices on beats 3-4? For the ending 4-bars, why not write "Sempre diminuendo" meaning "Always Diminishing" or "Morendo" to imply "dying away". Your pianissimo to Niente dynamic is a little messy with the spacing not consistent between all instruments. Final thing is to double check/ update is the idea of adding copyright information and a subtitle to say "for String Orchestra" or "for String Quartet". This helps as on first look of the score, the ensemble size is not mentioned. Good work!

The idea for this composition was inspired by @MK_Piano, after he sent me some footage of himself improvising in C minor on piano. I asked him if I could write something inspired by what he played, and was graciously allowed to do so. The piece utilizes a steady quarter note / eighth note moving rhythm and melody that symbolizes the passing of time during, and the emotional feelings felt in periods of contemplation, longing, rumination, and/or sorrowful reflection. Although, I feel as though it may be a bit too repetative, despite having variation in both rhythm, chord voicing, chord progression choice, including a modulation towards the end middle. I'm seeking to build upon the ideas I have in this score, more effectively. Any suggestions are welcome :) **UPDATE** Score Files updated to reflect any/all decided changes, based upon suggestions within this thread. 6/23/26 1:25pm EST Updated again 6/26/26 - New score files attached. 34823585 (1).pdf 34823585.mp3

Thanks very much for your suggestions! I'm revising the score to make some of these fixes. The cello line is not really meant to be the main feature; I think of it more like a cantus firmus, and I prefer the familiar melody to be there more subtly. But I didn't write slurs into the cello part just to try to give it a little bit of detachment from the other parts. Not sure how well that works, but that was the idea. The two quarter rests in those measures you mention are because the a tempo comes only on the fourth beat of the measure. Thanks again!

To highlight a few key differences between either piece, in Chopin's prelude the melodic contour seeks minimalism in a way that balances out the listener's focus and allows the left-hand chords to shine and be heard more clearly. However, in my composition, the melody is most of the time merely a product of the top line of the right-hand chords and while it does produce a distinctive effect due to the rhythmic motif and its characteristic contiguously rising and falling eighth note in the 4th beat of its initial measure, it is not a sufficiently distinctive part to be considered, in my view, integrally alienable from the lower voices or the right-hand chord progression as a whole. Well, some earlier pieces of mine, composed almost exclusively for piano specifically, were mostly focused on styles closer to that of this composition than those of my usual production, such as in this post: https://www.youngcomposers.com/t44435/triwaltzia-no-1 You're correct in pointing out the deviation from my usual style with heavy counterpoint. The title, however, was not actually a strict or entirely accurate stylistic descriptor, and instead it purely serves as an indicator of a particular style I sought to emulate from the Romantic era. It obviously does not account for the entire range of styles and genres that this period in the history of Western classical tradition has to offer, but instead builds an association based on the "vibes" of the music, if I may use such a term. I especially agree with your first line of criticsm: the constant reiteration of the same rhythmic motif ending up producing a far too monotonous, repetitive or boring impression was indeed a concern even before this piece was finished. However, every time I tried to vary the rhythms or change the bass, it felt jarringly sudden and unexpected, breaking pattern in a way that not only was far from subtle, but also completely imbalanced considering the listener's expectations after the first couple phrases. Adding a contrasting B section with an entirely different theme might have solved the issue, but I failed to execute such an option in time before the whole piece was nearly complete. The density of the chords doesn't concern me nearly that much. Reducing the number of internal voices in the middle sections seemed to create the same unexpected vacuum I just described, so as long it doesn't get in the way of the dynamic contrast across the piece I personally see no problem with it, since I'm certain any sufficiently skilled pianist would be able to perform those in spite of the uniform chord density throughout. I'm interpreting what you mean by the bass being "underused" as not providing sufficient rhyhtmic or schematic variety, which could just as easily be referring to the right hand chords, just as in your first point. As for the arpeggios, I disagree with the premise that it is merely an effect: it is integral to the motif across the whole composition. I do understand what you actually mean by that, however: it once again comes back to the original line of criticism. The bars you mentioned were unplayable without additional arpeggios merely included a major 9th and 10th. The 10th in question has been edited to an octave for easier performance with a smaller handspan, even though it is still arpeggiated. However, that doesn't solve the rest of the 10th in the 2nd beat of each measure in that sequence, so sorry in advance to pianists with smaller hands: I must admit feasible playability is still not my main priority (ah, what would I do without the wonders of modern technology...) Anyway, thank you kindly for your review and points of criticism. I will most likely take them into careful consideration when setting myself to write compositions similar to this one.

I'm wondering greatly why this piece did not receive any feedback (let alone positive and encouragingly complimentary feedback), even after 3 weeks and more. I absolutely love many elements that have been used in this score: Use of melodic Caliope (Baritone woodwinds, Soprano Strings) background call-and-response (alternating between Violone and Violin/Violinone) moment of introductory climatic moment (the herold of the Timpani's and Double-Bass's dotted-rhythmic march) Just to name the few things. It also invokes a beautiful sense of a late evening walk down an urban city. (I just checked the name of your piece again, and it speaks of the "Frank Bridge"! The setting illustration you were going for seems excellently executed!) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I do concur that arranging 2/4-hand Piano works into Orchestra is quite the arduous and ambitious task. Most people don't realize how difficult it really is to learn idiomatic writing for 30 or more instruments; so that your performers can perform your work at ease and with joy; and your audience can, at the same time, enjoy the listening experience of it. (I have come across a lot of works that is a 'joy' to play, because it's highly idiomatic and "quite easy to perform" with "minimal rehearsal"; but with little thought having been put into the music, which makes the listening experience of it a bit dull and flat. "Boring" music, as some would call it. In short, easy and simple to play; not fun to listen to!) As far as difficulty of instrumental writing is concerned (you brought up your virtuosic pitched percussion lines being advised by Musescore as difficult): a lot of times, it heavily depends on the personal practice (as well as personal incentive and motivation) by individual performers to bring your works to life. From my own experience: if it doesn't sound like how it's supposed to and/or it seems like the performer is struggling and making the music seem too difficult to fully and viably perform.... a lot of times, it's because they haven't practiced the music, and/or they simply need to care about it more. In these instances, it often has minimally or not at all to do with your own fine writing. Just as a composer-to-composer word of reassurance. ;) (Check out my own music score that I posed two days ago! I have spent time writing fairly to greatly idiomatically for many of the instruments; making the line seem 'harder' than it actually is. Yet, the players of its earlier first edition still struggled, when I gave it to a Philharmonic (one of 'the best' in Europe, as it is reputed; especially considering the historic famous composers who had given it premiere music to perform! Not naming names, not naming the orchestra) to performed. Furthermore, guess what?? During the first rehearsal, the dress rehearsal and the final performance that premiered this Tone Poem), it sounded like an intermediate half-learned high-school concert band that's just learning how to get it together. Individual instruments were literally sticking out, and a few sections were quite off pitch, shrill, crass and.... not performing the affects I was intending/asking for. This happened, despite having the music 3 weeks to a month before their final performance; and, they have the MIDI mockup. They were given the resources to make it happen. And, it didn't. It was very embarrassing, seeing that, at the end of the premiere, I had to stand up and take a bow. Forever, that European audience saw my face and will remember me: that it must be me as a composer. After speaking to people later down the line who reviewed the (earlier first edition of this) music, the remark I received was, "....Why was it not performed better?" or "... Why did they sound like that?" "The line is fairly easy and straight-forward to achieve, with some bit of practice." See that? Was it my music, or was it simply that my performers didn't care enough to practice it? I suppose I can diverge into the topic about Philharmonics rolling their eyes when it comes to having to "deal with" new student works (You know, 'here we go again...student works.... let's get this done, so that we can enjoy playing Beethoven and Shostakovich!!'), but I won't get too far off the topic at hand. What was my point in all of this? Your Vibraphone and Marimba lines are likely fine. It's probably regarded as difficult, but that certainly doesn't make it not viable and easy to learn! Really, it comes down to the attitude and the desire by your percussionists to learn and practice it!)

Thanks for the comments! In short, we'll see what happens with it. It something I will keep for later, but am unsure the direction I want to take it (Final form, duration, etc.) The main thing that is stopping me is inspiration specifically. While the summer, I am still rather busy and easily distracted currently. To your point about the note duration: It's more-so due to the computer. In performance/ final copy, I'd change it to a staccato and hopefully imply it's just meant to be the landing point of the run.

Hello! For anyone wondering, this is the little video I sent him. It is not the original improv I did, however, a visual aid to help with seeing chords and simply for fun: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vOLvUgbz4eGiWmd8e35tuUoJ3TkpUdR0/view?usp=sharing Red99, I will make my own comments later/ soon!

I think transitional periods are very interesting. This is the case with the galant style, which is firmly rooted in Baroque conventions but where dense counterpoint begins to give way to clearer melodies and accompaniment. Something similar happens between the Classical and early Romantic periods. I’m listening to your recommendation of Kraus, whom I wasn’t familiar with (Symphony in C minor), and it’s fantastic. I think the choice of instruments in your symphony is spot on. It depends on whether the approach is more chamber-music-like, as seems to be the case here, where there are many independent lines. As if it were an expanded quartet… It’s true that as soon as you move on a little in the style, chronologically speaking, you already come across flutes, oboes, bassoons and horns in pairs. Besides, if you don’t know what to do with so many instruments, you’re bound to get it only half right. This reminds me, albeit in a different context, of the fantastic versions of Chopin’s two piano concertos with a string quartet or quintet. Although it seems that Chopin himself used this arrangement for the music salons of the time, there are versions arranged by other composers. What I mean is that some pieces lend themselves to different approaches. Others do not lend themselves to interpretations that stray too far from their original spirit. Like when Wagner reorchestrated Bellini’s Norma in a ‘massive’ style, and then disowned his own version (it’s never performed; Bellini requires lightness, not a Wagnerian orchestra). Anyway, I’m getting off topic. Best regards

I’ve listened to the current version. I must say I loved it. And I’ll make a little confession. I like all musical styles and periods, from early music to contemporary. I have my favourite periods (the Baroque and Galant periods, late Romanticism, Impressionism and Expressionism, and in contemporary music, some things I like and others less so). The truth is that when I took the time to study music a little chronologically, I discovered how things develop. I say this because the Classical period is one of the ones that appeals to me the least. I think it’s down to the aesthetic they use, which is somewhat restrained – and well, we all know what this style is like. Your symphony seems to be in the Classical style, with hints of early Romanticism. It’s not that I’m obsessed with categorising things, but it helps to find points of reference. Regardless of that, when someone writes something like this with creativity, inspiration and a lot of hard work behind it, I love it, whatever it sounds like. Here I notice that the orchestra is of an early style; the woodwinds aren’t even in pairs and there are no brass instruments. But the way it sounds, it isn’t really necessary, to be honest. One of the things I’ve really liked is the clarity with which all the instruments sound when they have to stand out against, at times, a denser texture. There’s a moment when the bassoon takes the lead and it’s brilliant (bar 58). There are some lovely moments of counterpoint, such as the woodwinds from bar 20 or thereabouts. I think the score has been very carefully put together. What’s more, the music library sounds brilliant (is it the one from MuseScore?). Best regards.

Well, it's been so long since I was last here! I hope this community has been well since. I’m looking for some nice detailed peer feedback on my first Tone Poem, Myst o' Foryst a Spryng Nyte. It is a 5-part programmatic work written for a large woodwind/brass configuration, percussion ensemble, and features a prominent chamber core of Viola, Double-Bass, and Piano. (My "Alto Piano Trio" ensemble) I would be nicely interested in your thoughts on the orchestration, the pacing of the sections, and how you perceive the overall structural architecture as you listen along with the score. Please tell me of your stylistic impressions of this piece! (Note: this is a computer generated audio RENDER; not a live performance. Some of the techniques were lost in translation when it rendered, so it wouldn't sound correct. This is ESPECIALLY true of the audio files IIa and IIIa. If in a moment something sound so "wrong" and "off" in any of these audios, please rely on what is written on the page.) Thank you for your time and ear! Myst o 'Forest a Spryng Nyte (Composition) - 2nd edition - Audio portion I - meas. 1-149.mp3Myst o 'Forest a Spryng Nyte (Composition) - 2nd edition - Audio portion IIa - meas. 150.mp3Myst o 'Forest a Spryng Nyte (Composition) - 2nd edition - Audio portion IIb - meas. 151-223.mp3Myst o 'Forest a Spryng Nyte (Composition) - 2nd edition - Audio portion IIIa - meas. 224-236.mp3Myst o 'Forest a Spryng Nyte (Composition) - 2nd edition - Audio portion IIIb - meas. 237-275.mp3 A. Chen - Myst o' Foryst a Spryng Nyte - 000 - FULL SCORE (with Conductor's Rhythmic ref).pdf

Thanks for listening! Yeah, I appreciate the point about monotony. For such a short piece (really just four phrases, played very slowly), I thought I could get by with just the one motif in the upper strings. I did consider inverting it for the fourth phrase, but it didn't seem to work as well that way. Also, thanks for the note about the Gorecki symphony; I wasn't familiar with it. I did have some of Shostakovich's political works in mind. Another idea I had banging around in my head was a parodistic minor-key version of "The Star-Spangled Banner" in the militaristic style of some of Shostakovich's symphonies, but that felt a little more blunt than what I wanted. Can't decide whether I like the rather sterile name "Semiquincentennial", though I can't really come up with anything better. I almost wanted to call it "America the Hideous and Beautiful", but that sounds kind of sophomorically pretentious.

Sorry for the delayed reply. I gave it a listen. It has gotten better. The progression doesn't feel boring at all, and it maintains a consistent, calm atmosphere. At the same time, combined with the repetition of the melody, it actually started playing in my head on its own while I was doing other things. Also, regarding the awkwardness at 3:22 that I mentioned last time (which is around 3:15 in this version), in this new version, instead of feeling like a disconnect from the overall vibe of the piece, it now feels like an interesting twist in the progression. Best, Lithl.

@Markus Boyd Thank you for the detailed reply and the kind words, and your voice-leading examples.

Unsure why this hasn't had much attention yet. There is a lot of music here to unpack after listening. You have some great ideas, particularly during those moments of counterpoint & dialogue between the parts. So, you have my respect! You say it is 'Haydnesque' but I beg to differ. The structure is particularly quirky. You have three movements but within each there are multiple distinct tempo changes with new ideas introduced and some of these new subsections are individually repeated. So the structure does not say "sonata form" to me. However there are some moments where classical oriented ideas dominate that definitely veer the Viennese school. Voice leading is generally good. But some areas could benefit from attention. Lets look at an example: Your choice of progression here is V-V7-I. Usually with a so-fa-mi descent at a cadence I would utilize a Ic-V7-I harmonisation. It isn't incorrect what you have done - it works - but the question I would put forward concerns the added value of choosing a V instead in this context, particularly if the prior measure also contains dominant harmony. In traditional voice leading many of the best solutions depend on optimum harmonic decisions. Against the so-far-mi descent, there is an opportunity for contrary motion in an outer part. Having the F#-G ascent in the bass offers a better contrast arguably than in the inner voice (presently in the alto). In addition, while perhaps defensible, the bass and alto in your realisation both ascend to a perfect consonance (the G). The alto would be better descending in thirds with the soprano (B-A-G) - effectively both in contrary motion with the bass - while the viola maintains oblique motion on the D throughout the progression. This way you also do not omit the 5th of V7 (A) that - while permissible - is preferred if there is a means to include it and does not undermine the underlying ascetics: Omitting the 5th of a chord generally occurs when ascetically optimum. For example, if the upper voice had a 1-7-1 pattern: Disclaimer: In no way am I implying you are "incorrect" in your decisions. I cannot speak on your behalf as composer; but just be aware that where other solutions exist, justifications may become necessary...

This is a piece that I consider to be special. I have spent weeks working on it bit by bit, making one decision after another. It is Prelude No. 10 from Debussy’s Second Book, entitled ‘Canope’. A canope is the vessel in which the remains of mummies were stored in ancient Egypt; these were sealed with small sculptures of Anubis’s head. The piano piece is spectacular, with harmonies that defy all logic within the tonal world. I’m providing the score in concert pitch and in transposed pitch. Canope.mp3 Canope concert pitch.pdf Canope transposed pitch.pdf Link to the piano original version:

I'd never written for concert band before, however, that's the only ensemble, aside from one performance, that I've ever rehearsed and performed a production within... So I am very familiar with how the instrumentation is utilized in concert band scores. This was inspired by some work from another collegue of mine, that with their permission, I was allowed to put my own "twist" on it, and it is very very far from it's original form... I suppose that makes it more original than arrangement, but ah. I can't take all the credit for it if I didn't conjure it up myself from scratch. It's very short, and I didn't really have any intent on developing it into a more lengthy, complete piece, despite my desire to do so... I think it's quite extravigant, triumphant and reminds me of a hopeful feeling. I suppose the idea is that it can be used, potentially as an opener piece for a band somewhere, somehow. lol Let me know what y'all think P.S. Yes, I know there are a couple of engraving errors, such as Dynamic marking placements for example. The score isn’t a polished and finished product, 100% as of right now. Just an FYI 😅 Thanks!! -Unc EDIT I had some different harmonic ideas... Post has been updated :) Untitled score123.pdfUntitled score123.mp3

Wow, this sounds truly symphonic. I really liked it. To be honest, the whole business of bands is a bit of a mystery. Where I live, there are loads of them – they’re street bands… marching bands? What stands out here is that there are loads of clarinets. They’re bands designed to accompany parades and play ‘pasodoble’-style music and the like. I suppose there are lots of different set-ups.

I like what you have done here by essentially utilizing a well known (and somewhat cliched) sequence off the baroque period (Handel comes to mind) before demonstrating the range of tonal and chromatic possibilities with emerging romanticism. I admire your work. It at times feel they read too much as a technical exercise in counterpoint and voice leading. Your melodies need to sing! As Luis pointed out, the excessive use of arpeggios in the midi betray the experience. You could change the instruments to woodwind or strings to allow the suspensions to be sustained clearly, and utilize a quality sound set like the musescore library. You’re always on point with the technical delivery. But this doesn’t always guarantee that we ‘feel’ it. Just a suggestion ☺️ ps I’m Markus, nice to e meet!

Interesting stuff. I appreciate what you are trying to do with the key idea although to only have one single motif risks monotony, particularly when in a largely homophonic style. That said, monotony can be delivered ingeniously such as that first movement in 3rd symphony by Goreki, in which he embed essentially a dark and soulless motif that he sustains for well over 13 minutes, starting within the bass before consistent layering with the other instruments of the orchestra it above while rising steadily in pitch and dynamic intensity… before descending with largely the reverse. All of this is said to depict the machinations of nazi germany. Perhaps even the banality of evil. the key thing is that his motif seldom stops… it keeps going and going. Modulations are sparse, again perhaps to make it devoid of color. All of this is beautifully contrasted with a human voice emerges from those depths afterwards. This piece just came to mind because of the political connotations you’re striving for. Here it is

Hi again! I listened to this piece, and it is a challenging and great piece. I like it. It’s hard to explain, but to me, it sounded like an organ piece that doesn't actually sound like an organ piece. By that, I mean it feels so fluid and the notes feel so scattered that, in a very good way, it felt like listening to a piano piece. Is there a specific work you used as a reference? I don't know of any other music quite like this. I like your composing style. I will check out any other variations if you release them in the future. Thank you. P.S. Just a small suggestion, but if you could embed the YouTube link so people can listen to it right here without being redirected to YouTube, I think even more people would check it out!

Hi, thank you so much for listening to my composition, I really appreciate it! And I also appreciate that you took the time to check out my other works. As for plugins (VSTs), I usually tweak the very basic digital instruments available on MuseHub and try to get the most out of them 🙂

Hello, I listened to this piece, and to be honest, I really liked it. It’s a fun and captivating work to listen to. The structure has great dynamics, keeping it engaging throughout, you truly have wonderful composition skills. I also checked out your other works, and Five-minute pieces for violin and piano in particular is another fantastic piece, with music that flows like a river. Please continue to share your work in the future. I did notice a little bit of audio clipping at around 1:15 in this piece (Suite for clarinet, soprano saxophone and piano), but that doesn't really matter when compared to your composition. By the way, I would be really happy if you could tell me what plugins you are using. Thank you.

A nice and cute miniature piece. It is (obviously,) one movement long, and has 124 bars. It is written in Ab Major. https://musescore.com/user/96214813/scores/35260994 Sketch No. 1.mp3 Etuden Op. 53.pdf

Hello A few years ago, whilst on a course I took on ‘Contemporary Composition Techniques’, I wrote a short piece for piano which I later revised and titled ‘One more try’. Recently, I had the idea of orchestrating it. It is written in a free, non-functional, chromatic style. The score isn’t condensed because the instruments that come in pairs often have very different or distant lines. It’s in concert pitch. Below is a video of the piano version. One more try orch.pdf One more try 2.mp3 One more try 2.pdf

@Alex Weidmann Thank you for listening. Yes, the piano version is very different – more ‘intimate’, perhaps? – despite that crescendo. I was in no doubt that the brass section was meant for that part... When I orchestrate something that already exists (for piano, generally speaking), I have two options: 1) to be as faithful as possible, which in some cases is almost essential, 2) to recreate the piece for the orchestra. In this case, it usually turns out quite differently.

Hello I was surprised by this piece, which is in a very different style to what I’m used to. I must say that the melody works well and it gives me the feeling of a ballad from a 1960s film. I’m not sure to what extent you’ve worked in these styles, or in styles other than ornate counterpoint. What I notice here is that, curiously, there isn’t much of a counterpoint underpinning, which is nevertheless present in the Romantic period. I think the rhythmic motif, in particular, becomes a bit monotonous after more than 4 minutes. I also notice that the bass is underused as an accompaniment, and that the chords are excessively dense; the arpeggio loses its effect when it’s played all the time. And some sections are unplayable unless you resort to arpeggios again. (bars 8, 9 ...) The idea is good, but I think the overall approach falls a little short. Oh, I’d also like to mention (something I’ve said before) that Chopin’s Prelude in E minor takes a very different approach. The chords are the essence of the piece, due to their minimal movement and the perfect voice leading they achieve.

Bois, lads, (or anyone of persuading affiliation), it is time for this piece to not die! I have found another call for scores fitting the instrumentation requirements in Boston, MA. I have just finished my application and will find out mid or late July. Here's to some success! (Also, updated the score to match new engraving... once again lol)

Hello Everyone! After a brief hiatus from the forum for a much needed vacation and music-recharge, I am back home and beginning to try out new ideas for chamber pieces. I have written a lot of music for large ensemble and wish to dial it back down to chamber and solo music over the course of 2026. The first part in this is to showcase an idea I felt passionate about a few weeks ago. As I began to write it out this week, I feel the flame has kindled and I may not finish/ expand upon it later as I have a lot of ideas I want to explore now in other places. This Fantasie is not as extensive as the classical and baroque styles, however it's a fantasie in the sense of my improvisation with the string quartet. The only thing I wrote down was the first four bars of melody, everything else was what I made in the moment and over the last few days. Let me know what you think and as always, thanks for viewing this post! AUDIO-Fantasie in F#-minor.mp3 SCORE_Fantasie in F#-minor.pdf

Excellent 🗿. Can't help you much with the inspiration thing, but it's a great start. I'll follow the topic in case you drop some news!

Unexpected crescendo! It bought me. Not that much the più mosso, but it's still good, yet I feel it could be extended, and each time I listen to it I am more and more convinced, maybe a repeated section or something else playing with the material you have already put over the table would not hurt. That there are no measure numbers is a bit painful to me, but I'll use an image: These notes duration don't convince me too much, specially the first time they appear: I'm not 100% sure why but it's either that the attack of the computer performance that sounds too plain or something else. I think I have little more useful feedback this time. Great job, MK! Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

Hello, I posted an earlier iteration of this work some time ago. A lot has since formed. The general structure of the first movement is complete; I still intend to vary the recapitulation somewhat as I prefer to not simply repeat the second subject verbatim. But it is more or less done. I have also made a start on the second movement. This movement has a slightly unusual disposition and is on the way for becoming an ambitious piece with its emerging structure in mind. I am posting here in advance of completion to gauge people's feelings about the musical ideas. Perhaps if anyone has suggestions I would love to hear perspectives. Or even if you like it, that helps to say too. Composing is otherwise an activity for solitude! Second movement is @ 05:40. Thanks! Markus Symphony in A (Draft).mp3 Symphony in A (Draft).pdf

Hi Luis, For me the most successful part of this orchestration is your highly effective brass writing, especially in Bars 19-22. Overall it reminds me of "5 Orchestral Pieces" Op.16 by Schoenberg. I like the piano version too: I find it atmospheric and relaxing. Surprisingly mellow compared to the orchestral version!

Thanks, Luis. I am definitely being pulled towards early romanticism, and I am glad this is apparent. In recent years I have begun to listen to more Beethoven (generally early Beethoven, though) and his contemporaries (Like Reis, Anton Eberl). But I have also become increasingly influenced by the Sturm und Drang tradition. As such,Kraus Is one current influence, particularly his c minor symphony that Haydn, after hearing, declared Kraus a genius. Sudden dramatic shifts are a hallmark of this style; the intention is often to keep the audience on edge, unsure what is coming next - despite remaining in the 'confines' of common practice. At least in historically informed performance today, top orchestras utilize stacatissimo technique in the strings (especially in the bass) during such moments in the minor that generates a kind of "badass" or "rogue" vibe that conveys an immense attitude that quite often overwhelms my own senses. If you listen to the Kraus, you will hear this effect in the climatic opening from around the 3 minute mark. There is also some late Mozart. I first thought it was derived from Beethoven's slow movement from symphony 1 but is in fact Mozart's Prague symphony (compare the passage from bar 29 of his slow movement with 51 of mine). It essentially serves a modulatory function. Quite often these influences are subconscious and I find only later where they came from. Borrowing should be acceptable provided it is aligned with my own motivic development (hence my own unique spin rather than verbatim that might otherwise be out of place). You have found a weakness of mine. Orchestration is not a skill I have cultivated nearly as much as counterpoint & voice leading. This is why I tend to write chamber music only. Writing this work is intentionally out of my comfort zone. There is brass in this work but is used sparingly. And the woodwind pairings is something I should explore. The main thing is that the voice leading is outlined; the rest should largely be a doubling exercise. I will have to do some studies into this, however. The winds, brass and percussion is the default muse library (the base subscription package). The strings are the 'spitfire' package that cost me around £40.

Hi, UncleRed99. This forum often seems so advanced that I hesitate to comment on others' work, but I saw your Chatbox and decided to take this opportunity to leave a comment. Please keep in mind, I'm just a beginner. Feedback/Impression: First, I tried to look for the video by MK_Piano, which was your source of inspiration, but I couldn't figure out which one it was. As a result, I wasn't able to check how you developed it, though I was very interested. In my honest opinion, while I did feel several transitions and the descriptive scenery based on them just as you intended, the piece felt a bit redundant. Assuming that redundancy wasn't the concept of this work, I felt that adding more dynamics to the left-hand chords could help improve it. The new section starting from 4:16 is wonderful. To me, it felt like a temporary relief and liberation. When I first heard this part, I imagined strings playing in my head :) I didn't have any particular complaints about the part from 4:16 onwards, but as I mentioned earlier, the sections leading up to it felt a bit redundant. I felt this especially during the section starting around 0:30. Also, for the transition starting at 1:52, I thought it might be nice to halve the number of times the left-hand chords are played, or reduce them even more, to make the texture sparser and create a more melancholic atmosphere, and then burst into the open atmosphere at 2:33 all at once. The transition starting from 3:22 felt so abrupt that it seemed a bit disconnected from the concept. I couldn't think of a concrete solution, but I believe a smoother transition would suit it better. The overall atmosphere of this piece is lovely and good. P.S. I'm sorry if these advices aren't very useful, but I hope they help even just a little. By the way, I would love it if you could tell me what plugins you used. Thank you. Best, Lithl.

Yeah, that's the idea and one of the possible changes! However, in this version you changed the melody at the cadence right before. In this new version the melody at the end of the previous section soars higher than in the original one. I think, if you play the melody an octave higher, it is better to keep the melody prior to that in the same range as in the original version, since, otherwise, it breaks the novelty of the higher rang. You could also keep this new melodic ascend at the cadence and that might add some contrast for the entrance of the original melody you had in G5. Also, I think in both versions, one of the main issues is that the Cmin accompaniment chords are too loud. I would make those chords much softer and, in general make that whole section softer than the previous one (both melody and accompaniment, but specially the later). Thiis dynamic change could also help quite a lot.

Hello! I have completed a first listen and looked over the score. I hope to do a deeper dive and analyze the score thoroughly, and the following are my initial thoughts. Very much classical style, and quite refreshing to hear something in that style again. Check your engraving. Over the entire score, you have rests with dynamic markings. Page layout can be bigger or staves made smaller. At least 4 measures per page. There is key information missing from the score. If anything, the number of instruments as well as copyright information. You just say "Flute, Oboe, Clarinet," however, do you intend for more than 1 player for this part? Between the two movements, in Musescore, you can add a "SYSTEM BREAK" which will end the piece and add a pause after a double bar line. On the next page, it will list the full instrument parts again. (in the layout palette) With the literal music, there is more play you can do with the structure or in your accompaniment parts I think. 5-minutes for a classical symphony is on the shorter side and you can mess with the idea of a repeat after the exposition and utilize a 1st and 2nd ending to propel yourself into the development. It's not a "double exposition" per-say, however very common for the music of the time.

Hello everyone! How are you? I would like to share my latest composition with you. This time, it is a variation on an old Czech hymn "Vstalť jest této chvíle". I’d really appreciate it if you gave it a listen. Thank you!

yes! there are a large variety of ensemble choices available, which, in the context of concert bands, are largely comprised of wind instruments, almost exclusively, with a bigger emphasis on accompanying percussion instruments as well.

Hello, friends! How are you doing? I am happy to present my latest composition to you. This one is more challenging to listen to, full of contrasts and wildness that are typical for me, even though I try to incorporate a certain system into my music, which may not be obvious at first listen. Thank you to everyone who decides to support me by listening, and I wish you every success in your creative endeavors!

As the third installment in my enharmonic perpetual canon cycle, this one follows a procedure nearly identical to that of the first one and is quite similar in duration as well. The lyrics (once again, in Latin) sung by the choir translate as follows: "Change is inevitable in all things. Everything flows in the balance of those who are tempestive." As with the previous installment, the coda further drives the meaning to greater clarity and realization. YouTube video link:

Thank you for your review. I should point out, however, that the chorus is intended to sound louder in order for the lyrics to be at the very least audible and not drowned by the orchestra, let alone trying to make them sound barely intelligible. I find it optimal since the choir is singing the canon in th exact same configuration as the other instrumental sections: the placement of the voices across different lines and registers is the exact same for all three. And also, there is no brass in the score or audio. This is not intended as a symphonic orchestral arrangement, and I personally dislike the timbre of brass instruments and even some woodwinds such as the saxophone for example, so they are not getting included in the score anytime soon. Have a nice day.

Hi @JorgeDavid, Below is my review of your waltz: Form: There are two district different sections that have their own character with the composition. The tonal centers and relations between is not common. I feel this would fit with in middle romantic period. I am not sure about the dramatic pause at the end of melodic phrase. It is rather sudden and jarring. It disrupts the natural flow of piece. Harmony and texture: There is a high sense of chromatism with in waltz. I wonder about how those harmonies are prepared and resolved correctly. The bass line fits with in the standard waltz type pattern in first section and breaks away in the middle section. Thematic material: A couple things to note: the ending of each melodic phrase with chromatic note seems unsettling. G-F#-A. While there is a sense of melodic sequence with each phrase, it is hard to detect the general structure (sentence, period, or hybrid). This was original piece and was truly creative. With in my musical taste, I like to hear more music like this. I.e. find a way to create a natural flow with each phrase. think about what I said about structure and form and how the works with the underlaying the harmony. Otherwise, you good start. Kvothe.

I like the sparse atmosphere, and I think you developed the material in a creative way on the 4th page, cranking up the dissonance a bit. This has an exotic flair to it. It's got a chill vibe, but a potent flavor. Cool! Thanks for sharing!

A revamped and corrected version of a previously published prelude and fugue transposed from F-sharp minor to E minor, originally comprised of two separately uploaded works joined together as neatly as possible. YouTube video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMss1kFsid8 Prelude and Fugue in E minor.mp3 Prelude and Fugue in E minor.pdf

As stated in the title, I've been recently experimenting with ways to add more voices to Bach's 14 canons (BWV 1087) based on the multiple contrapuntal transformations of the harmonic bassline of the Goldberg Variations' Aria. Despite being derived from the tonally transposed inversion of that main theme, the so-called "Theme 2" has been kept separate across this whole compendium since it isn't contrapuntally compatible with its inversion when also retrogradated, syncopated or played with "per arsin et thesin" imitation simultaneously. Had the latter not resulted in whole segments of parallel ocatves, an 8-voice "omnibus" canon might have been possible, but that seems to be out of the scope of these musical materials without significant alterations that would render their canonic accompaniment non-imitative and thus, non-canonic at all. There is one canon from the original that is conspicuously absent from this recollection and that is the penultimate, 13th variation: a triple canon a 6 so densely packed and finely tuned in its original conception that adding more voices without irrecognizably altering the basic structure of the others turned out to be practically impossible. Almost like Bach himself knew this one canon, in its apparent simplicity yet brilliantly complex counterpoint, was the worthiest and most perfect when he chose to be depicted holding it for his portrait. Admittedly, this video would have been better suited for this year's 276th anniversary of Bach's passing (July 27th). However, due to my tightly packed schedule this summer, I find it highly unlikely I'll be able to post anything in time to commemorate that date, hence why I'm posting this video as soon as possible in order to leave room for focusing on my final exams. Lastly, it would be short of an understatement to recognize late Gerubach's video on the 14 Canons proved invaluable to my understanding, research and tinkering with these canons, as well as the core material of much of Bach's repertoire as a whole. Some of his most laborious contributions have since been taken down after his passing more tha three years ago now in 2023, such as for example the scrolling video on the Art of the Fugue. The quality of my scrolling certainly doesn't come anywhere close to his standards, and yet, as poor and humble a homage this may be, I have chosen to honor his memory and the tireless spirit of his countless contributions by acknowledging at the very least the gargantuan influence he has had on the accessible spread of Bach's music and its myriad intricacies. YouTube video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g00QMPNDyY Google Drive folder link (full score + audio): https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1J8NblMrM6T-3muEjVO4j8TKspVfyzDuk?usp=sharing J. S. Bach's 14 Canons BWV 1087 Vocibus Pluribus Additis.mp3 J. S. Bach's 14 Canons BWV 1087 Vocibus Pluribus Additis.pdf

Hi Nd, welcome to the forums! Do you happen to have a score of this? Interesting choice of piano, by the way. I'm not particularly fond of the way it attacks the notes that are outside of the high register but that's a more a matter of taste than anything else I will likely say in this message. I found some nice moments of calm in your piece, such as the section starting at ~1:10, or the section that preludes the end. Some others, such as the accelerando + pedal and the passage preceding it (1:35 and on, more or less) were not really my thing, they seem forced and for me, not in a good way. Question: did you publish the No.3, No.2 or No.1 here? Just out of curiosity. Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

Since today is this year's Mother's Day, I finally decided to finish revamping a composition I had already published for the very same occasion 3 years ago. Compared to the original, the whole piece has been transposed from E to B minor in order to better accommodate for newly included passages. However, still not dissimilar from the first drafts, passages with constant false relations are abundantly featured in this piece, to the point that the harmonic resolutions expected of more conservative counterpoint are frequently sacrificed for the sake of chromatic saturation. Scrolling video link (YouTube): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYUZX-iQSF4 Passacaille en Valse in B minor.mp3 Passacaille en Valse in B minor.pdf

In anticipation for this year's Christmas Eve, I decided to try my hand at writing another religious motet. Considering the fact that the bulk of this piece has been composed merely in the span of yet another insomnia-driven bout of inspiration, perhaps its modest length may as well be a reflection of missed potential, as I reckon it could have been developed into a more complex structure should its latter half not have got stuck on a protracted pre-cadential spiral. Once again, just as with my previous vocal fugue, the main goal of this composition was to make the text as intelligible as possible (specially taking into account the musical history of such a well-known textual setting), that is, within the confines and constraints of an 8-voice motet. This has ultimately led to some interesting contrapuntal oddities which, despite the preservation of independent voice-leading and thorough avoidance of melodic and harmonic blunders, have produced a number of somewhat unorthodox unresolved dissonances throughout. Nevertheless, I believe such contrapuntal licenses are more than sufficiently justified given the scope of this piece, as well as the sheer volume and density of its texture all the way through. This piece was specifically conceived as a submission for this year's edition of the forum's Christmas Music Event, and shall be presented accordingly in its dedicated thread. YouTube video link: Motet a 8 O Magnum Mysterium in E-flat major.mp3Motet a 8 O Magnum Mysterium in D major.mp3 Motet a 8 O Magnum Mysterium in E-flat major.pdf Motet a 8 O Magnum Mysterium in D major.pdf Motet a 8 O Magnum Mysterium in D major.mp3 Motet a 8 O Magnum Mysterium in D major.pdf Motet a 8 O Magnum Mysterium in D major.mp3 Motet a 8 O Magnum Mysterium in D major.pdf

After undergoing plenty of struggle to find a proper textual setting capable of matching the rhythmic patterns of this vocal fugue, I decided to settle for an altered version of the "Libera me" movement commonly found on Requiem masses. Despite the minor changes required for the text to fit the subject of the fugue, its treatment throughout has been a conscious attempt to make it as audibly intelligible as possible, as opposed to the vast majority of my previous vocal works, where any regard for the text was completely secondary to the music. This composition, as well as its harrowing message, has been dedicated in memoriam to the victims of the Wang Fuk Court fire, which tragically befell Hong Kong on November 26th. May their souls find peace and eternal rest. 請安息吧！ YouTube video link: