Leaderboard

Hello my friends! I’m happy to present my Binary Sonata No. 26 to you as well. I hope you enjoy it!

Hi! I am continuing my revision on my old work. This is the 2nd movement of my Clarinet Quintet in C minor, which is completed 4 years ago and I'm revising it. Thx to my friend @Thatguy v2.0 for making the audio! To me this is probably the worst movement in the piece, but only because it's the most one dimensional one: After the discovery of despair in the 1st movement, I started to fall into confusion and craziness of despair. Ironically this movement is written in a neat Sonata form with the structure presented below: 0:00 First subject, exposition. Start right from the despair Eb-D-C-B motive in quick Scherzo time to represent the fury and confusion of despair. Clarinet joins in 0:31, still playing at the despair motive, and in 0:33 the whirling figure using despair motive signifying the confusion is introduced. 1:27 Transition, exposition. I like this pizz. theme myself for how sarcastic it is. 2:34 Second subject, exposition. In F minor. A more "reasonable" theme finally with major keys visited, although finally succumbed to the confusing despair. I always go to F minor instead of G minor for the secondary key of a C minor movement for its darkness. 3:46 Development. Continue with the confusion by quickly modulating to different keys. I really love the 3:59 passage with a Brahmsian turn to a German sixth chord in 4:09! The fury ends with a "transcended" sadness in Neapolitan C# minor in 5:20 with a clarinet solo, but sarcastically laughed off by pizzicato strings in another Brahmsian German sixth. 5:49 First subject, recapitulation. Excitement reduced after a suffocating development. In 6:02 obviously I learn from Beethoven's 5th for that famous solo oboe passage. I love how fierce it is in 6:38. 6:47 Transition, recapitulation. Shorter than exposition's transition. I hate exact repetitions. 7:25 Second subject, recapitulation. Same as the one in exposition except in tonic key. Notice how relative major Eb major is finally used with some emphasis for the very first time in the piece, as the confrontation of B flat carried by E flat major and B natural by C minor of the despair motive would be the main battlefield later on. 8:38 Coda. One last cry and I am exhausted by the despair, thus ends the movement in tired pizzicato chords. Only with this exhaustion do I have the motivation to excavate the true reason behind the despair, which would be the main theme for the 3rd movement. Here is the score and youtube video of the movement : (For YT)Clarinet Quintet in C minor 2nd mov Final Version 20260707.pdf Harmonically I deliberately play with chord progression of augmented triad keys to reinforce that particular chord both horizontally and vertically, as well as resonating with the despair motive. Hope you enjoy this one and offer some critique to the movement! P.S. This is the 1st movement of the remastered version of the work: Henry Clarinet Quintet in C minor 2nd mov Final.mp3

Hello everyone, I am back to feature an overhauled work of mine: The Tuckasegee Flyer. CONTEXT: Originally written in 2024 by commission from my friend, Brody, this work was meant to accompany a YouTube video series he was creating. Two years later, and during this summer, I felt in a trough of composition. I have sketched a lot of ideas for themes or independent phrases, however, I had no passion or inspiration to make them into full pieces. So, after looking through my file system, I looked through this work and immediately, I had ideas. This work is an orchestral depiction of what it feels like to ride behind a steam locomotive as seen or felt by a passenger. If you would like to know more specifics and a longer explanation of the work, go to the 3rd page of the PDF (which is listed as page 1 due to the front and back of the cover page). Thanks for viewing my score and taking a listen! (Comments welcome) This work in its current state would not have been possible without the support of friends and fellow composers. Big thank you to @UncleRed99 for his help with understanding brass ensembles as well as non-YCF composer @Arbolav for his help in the development. You two elevated this piece and I am forever thankful! The Tuckasegee Flyer_AUDIO.mp3 The Tuckasegee Flyer_SCORE.pdf The Tuckasegee Flyer_SCORE.pdf The Tuckasegee Flyer_SCORE.pdf

I'm not done with the score for this yet: so please forgive the sloppy notation. Just hoping to get some comments on my orchestration choices before I finalise it. I know there are arrangements of this piano work for various ensembles; but I couldn't find one for symphony orchestra: so I thought I'd make one. Hope you enjoy listening! Rachmaninoff - Elegie in E♭ minor (orchestration) #26 (midi).mp3 Rachmaninoff - Elegie in E♭ minor (orchestration) #26 (midi).pdf

Oh! These are great badges! Thank you @PeterthePapercomPoser and the support team! I like the designs for "Synthesizer Wizard," "Gentlefolk," and "Stimulator" are especially wonderful! Very nice! Also, adding this text to the first post in this topic ( @PeterthePapercomPoser's post listing the awards) might make things clearer! By the way, there is someone I would like to nominate for a badge, so I’ll take this opportunity to mention it here. Person's name: @Vasilis Michael Badge: Meticulous Composer Topic for the badge: https://www.youngcomposers.com/t50201/sonata-no-26-in-a-major-binary/ Reason: I think the piano composition itself is crafted with incredible precision—including the interplay between the left and right hands. Furthermore, the piano playback is really amazing; the articulation and sound clarity reflect that same meticulous attention to detail, which is why I wanted to award him this badge. His pieces are always wonderful, after all :) Best, Lithl.

I’ve just finished my Serenade for String Orchestra, a piece that ended up having a rather unusual composition history. Some of the material goes back to 2021, while the first two movements were written mostly in 2024, and I finally completed the work this August with the Elegie and Finale. It wasn’t originally conceived as a single continuous project, but over time the different ideas seemed to belong together and eventually became this five-movement serenade: Präludium, Scherzo, Intermezzo, Elegie and Finale. Despite the different periods in which it was written, I think it ended up having a fairly consistent character—mostly light and calm, with the Elegie providing its more introspective moment. I. Präludium — A calm, pastoral opening that establishes the overall character of the work. II. Scherzo — A very fast and light movement, providing the most energetic and playful music of the serenade. III. Intermezzo — Relaxed and flowing, almost like a leisurely walk, without becoming overly reflective. IV. Elegie — The most introspective and melancholic movement, gradually building towards a more intense emotional climax. V. Finale — Begins with a tonally unsettled, march-like introduction before breaking into a bright and joyful A major conclusion, with brief returns of material from earlier movements. Hope you enjoy it, and I’d be very happy to hear any thoughts or feedback! Serenade.pdf

Hello A number of interesting topics. I’m speaking from a position of inexperience and, more to the point, as I’m still learning, so all of this is just suggestions or other possible options. As I said, it sounds brilliant as it is. Firstly, the issue of transposition for orchestra. I agree with what your teacher (your piano teacher, that is) said. But I think we need to consider making things easier for the instrumentalists. Another point is that it doesn’t really matter to us. It’s going to sound the same, at least in the context of virtual instrument libraries. But the reality is that in this key of E flat minor, it’s more complicated for the strings because there are no open strings; they have to ‘press down’ with their fingers all the time, losing resonance, and so on… I can see problems for the harp too, because being tuned to six flats puts a lot of strain on it. And changes may be more difficult. I think the woodwinds would be most comfortable with this. This key is rarely used in the orchestral repertoire, and I think it’s sought after for dark, tragic, profound tones. Perhaps it would suit something like the Elegy. As far as I’m aware, in the symphonic repertoire, the only works in E-flat minor are by Russian composers: Prokofiev’s Symphony No. 6, Rimsky-Korsakov’s Symphony No. 1 (which he himself transposed to E minor later), and a few others. The other issue, that of arpeggios… You see, in my orchestration classes and seminars we’ve discussed this quite a lot, as well as Alberti basses, etc… How do you adapt them for an orchestra? As I said in my previous message, a literal translation can, of course, work, because there are instruments capable of playing those arpeggios. However, we’re now dealing with an orchestra. It doesn’t have to be a single instrument that does everything. The important thing, I believe, is that the rhythm is clearly marked (with accents and pizzicato, for example), and that the figures are in the appropriate pitches and note values for each instrument. This is also where the question of how faithful one wants to be to the original score comes into play. That’s down to personal preference; we can be very literal, or we can take the main ideas and create an orchestral version. It’s true that for some scores I find it less appropriate to take liberties (for example, when orchestrating Baroque counterpoint), I’ve written these few bars in one possible arrangement, which I’m sure could be improved; I also think it would sound softer on the strings, especially with mutes. Haha, in the very first lessons I had on all this, we worked on Mozart and pieces like that, precisely to translate those piano accompaniments into something else. Cheers. Proyecto.mp3

Wow, my friend, thank you so much for this! ❤️ I honestly didn’t expect it, and it means a lot to me. Being described as a “Meticulous Composer” is a particularly meaningful compliment, because I really do care deeply about the smallest details in my music — from the interaction between the hands and the articulation to the harmonic choices and the overall character of a piece. I’m especially touched that you chose the Sonata No. 26 as an example, but even more by the fact that you see this quality throughout my work. After all, these pieces are a very personal part of my musical journey. Thank you again for your kindness and support, my friend. I’m genuinely grateful to have my music appreciated in such a thoughtful way. ❤️

A magnificent piece: I love it! Especially the way it combines Baroque counterpoint with a modern harmonic language. The only problem is, it's unplayable in places. Bars 28 and 35 to name but two examples. Human hands cannot reach all those notes! Also Page 2 would benefit from having the left hand in treble clef most of the time; otherwise you have too many ledger lines to read. The notation is generally quite confusing to the eye. This is partly down to the voice allocations. Bar 47 is a good example. The lower notes in the right hand would be far easier to read if they were merged into the left hand. The upper notes in right hand voice 2 should be in voice 1, and the B natural is unplayable. Definitely worth revising this piece to fix these problems, as I think the composition is very good. It would be a difficult piece to pull off; but could be made playable for sure. Btw, the audio sounds strangely muffled sometimes. Not sure what's happened there? Anyway, hope that helps. Alex

As per @Lithl 's suggestion, some new badges have been published! Yes - good point! If you wish to anonymously nominate someone for an award, you can message any of the staff privately and we will take your nomination into consideration!

Hi @Vasilis Michael ! Another great work my friend! That Neapolitan F major resolved to E major in 0:40 sounds so magical to me. I would describe your style as a mix of Schubert and Scarlatti! Both composers are magical in their modulations and you too! Henry

Hi @MK_Piano ! A really exciting and enjoyable piece! I have a lot to learn from your scoring and engraving and orchestration skills. The energy level in the outer sections is so well maintained which reminds me how vivacious you are in real life and here. I thoroughly enjoy this one, as this is not something I can compose. I don't have this kind of energy level myself and hence nothing similar to show in my own pieces. My favourite section is the middle section. It's real nice contrasting section featuring woodwinds when the outer sections are predominated by brass and strings. The counterpoint here is better than the outer sections too haha, because in the outer sections you feature more homophony and octave doublings which is apt to the steam theme too! And then some of my subjective thoughts: I think there is a bit unbalance in b.47 Rehearsal no. F to modulate to D flat major. Maybe an 8 bar phrase will be better than the 6 bar phrase now, but that's my personal thought. Also, I think you can have more prominent changes in the last A section, other than the key which is the most obvious change. Yes the orchestration is varied there and the texture is even thicker than the exposition, but I think you can slightly change the order of events in the recap, and change the modulation plan, since you modulate from Eb to Db major in the exposition, modulating from F to Eb major sounds similar to me so the heightening effect by modulating is weakened to me. I think ending in Eb major is the right option as to maintain the same key for the beginning and end, so you can begin in a key other than F major in the start of section L, which gives another advantage for having another modulation apart from the middle section, which is also in F major. P.S. Huge props to you @UncleRed99 for bringing @MK_Piano here! Definitely vitalizing the forum much more haha! Thx for sharing this wonderful piece! Henry

This^ My thoughts exactly

@MK_Piano and I have been composing together / critiquing one another's works for a time before either of us were apart of this forum. I recently brought him onto it, as a way for him to share his works with you all, when I am unavailable to give insight on what he is working on. Although, he is much more Theory-Literate than I am, on account that he actually followed thru with his music education, unlike myself, who dropped out of school back in 2018 😅 But yes, we have brought up the idea a couple of times, and even started something, but never followed thru with it, I think, simply due to incompatibility in terms of scheduling. We will likely get around to it, some time. But for now, consider many of our works to be collaborations in and of themselves. We've contributed something to many of eachother's scores, be it small or large contributions, we've had a hand in one another's work in some fashion for a time, now. :)

@MK_Piano, you’ve created another wonderful piece! The way the composition unfolds right from the opening is fantastic. The section starting at 0:55 reminded me of the sound of a steam train whistle; it has a real sense of momentum, and the percussion works well, too. The part starting at 1:55 is a particular favorite of mine—the melody is so memorable. The calm section that follows at 2:25 is also excellent; the piece really tells a story. I’m sorry I can’t offer any specific advice regarding the sheet music or technical details. By the way, it looks like you and @UncleRed99 get along really well! I’d love to hear a full-scale collaboration between the two of you someday :) Best, Lithl.

My dear Henry, thank you so much, my friend! ❤️ I’m really happy that you noticed that particular moment with the Neapolitan — it’s one of those harmonic moments I especially love, and I’m very glad that it felt so magical to you. And the fact that you describe my music as a mix of Schubert and Scarlatti is a huge compliment to me, especially coming from a musician and composer whose work I appreciate so much. They are two composers I deeply love, and in my own way, I feel that I find something of myself in both of them. Thank you sincerely for your beautiful words, Henry. Your opinion means a lot to me, and I’m very happy that we can continue sharing our music with each other! ❤️ Also, when I find some time, I definitely want to listen to the Clarinet Quintet you posted. I’m really looking forward to hearing it! ❤️

Hi @Lithl ! Thx for your review! I learn from my past failure and you can check out my first post here, it’s the earlier version of the quintet and the dynamic there is so bad 🫣 To me this movement is about dark and crazy energy despair brings me. The 1:53 melody is a sarcastic one to play with, and 5:27 even more sarcastic when I failed to claim transcendence for my suffering haha. The ending represents the exhaustion of energy with pizzicato as this gives way to internal reflection for the 3rd movement (which I consider the best movement of the work), so stay tuned! Henry

I’m starving. Really, starving. Starving for new music. Starving for new composers. He, the Algorithm, he is always offering similar menus. But I want to eat a wider range of music. Any kind of music is fine, totally, fine. Ethnic, Avant-Garde, Pop, Classical, Jazz, WHATEVER. Yes I promise, I promise to react to your post in this topic whenever I log in. So please… please… let… me… know… I’m Starving...

My dear friend, thank you so much from the bottom of my heart for this wonderful comment! ❤️ I’m incredibly happy that you enjoyed the sonata, and even more so that you noticed so many details in the music, from the dynamics and tempo transitions to the interplay between the two hands and the way the music leads towards its conclusion. These are things that are very important to me when I write. And what you said about my scores—that you can somehow sense the thought and warmth behind their creation—really touched me. For me, a score is not simply a way of writing music down; it is a part of my thoughts and a little piece of myself. And as for Scarlatti, your comment is an enormous compliment to me, because his music has had such a deep influence on this part of my musical journey. 😊 Thank you again for your kindness, for taking the time to listen to my music so carefully, and for continuing to find something of your own in it. I truly appreciate it my friend! ❤️

Um... is this an undiscovered work by Scarlatti or something like that? Anyway, some people in this forum have amazing compositional skills and knowledge. Not everyone does, though, and I mean, hats off to such people. And I think you are one of them. At least, I think so. You have amazing composition skills. I appreciate this piece. The resonance of the sound is great, and it excels in every respect—from the dynamics and tempo transitions to such a smooth, flowing quality and a well-executed conclusion. The interplay of sound between the left and right hands is also nice. It feels as if the sound is sparkling. By the way, I like your sheet music. I’m not qualified to judge the technical accuracy of the scores, but there is a certain quality to them—you can sense the deep thought that went into their creation. They have a real warmth to them. Ok, this world is "so fair" that even when we compose for ourselves as a hobby, etc., there are magnificent differences, haha. Hats off to you, again, @Vasilis Michael!! I like your pieces! Best, Lithl.

After some thought, I think I'll scrap the piece, just keeping my A section and seeing what I can do with that.

I did not use MuseScore for that. I used Adobe Acrobat for the watermark.

Hello It’s fine to experiment and explore different sounds. But these extreme approaches need to be handled with care. The piccolo is not, by its very nature, a solo instrument, but rather an extension of the flutes. Of course, there are passages where it can take a solo moment, and so on, with the necessary support. Even complete works. And there are reasons for this. And that is what I’d like to discuss, in the hope that it will spark debate and help us learn in general. If we turn to Rimsky-Korsakov’s classic treatise on orchestration: “Instruments operating above the high octave (i.e. notes higher than C6 or the C on the sixth additional line in the treble clef, such as the piccolo or the extreme register of the flute and the violins) have an extremely brilliant and penetrating sound, but lack body, ‘thickness’ and harmonic weight.” (Note that the piccolo sounds an octave higher than it is written.) There is, therefore, a ‘rule’ regarding lower doubling. Specifically for the piccolo or flutes playing above C6, the melody must be doubled an octave lower, assigned to the oboes, clarinets or violins. More recent authors (Adler and Piston) justify this as follows: -Loss of Fundamental: From C6 upwards, the human ear perceives the shrillness and upper harmonics very strongly, but the fundamental frequency loses its acoustic ‘weight’. The lower doubling ‘anchors’ the melody to the orchestra’s mid-range frequencies, giving it body. -The ‘Floating’ Effect: If the lower doubling is not performed, the melody becomes detached from the rest of the orchestral texture, sounding disconnected, thin and ‘floating’ above it without blending in. -Aural Fatigue: As noted in contemporary orchestral literature, maintaining pure melodic lines above C6 without a cushion or lower doubling causes fatigue in the listener due to a lack of frequency balance.

I published this score on the good ole' Tik-Tok, and boy.... I guess the "For You" browsers really liked it... 😅

He does this with a PDF Editor tool, if I'm not mistaken

My dear fellow composers, after some weeks of quiescence, I’m presenting to you today my first attempt at orchestrating an existing composition for a full symphony orchestra. The „sketch“ I have chosen is a composition of my own, a huge six-part quadruple fugue for piano in B minor, from which I picked the fourth episode being a transitional section between the development sections. I especially love that section for its modulations, its slow arpeggios and the interwoven voice leading, which finally leads to a calming point on a diminished seventh chord before starting the next fast development section. As I have no experience in orchestration for an entire ensemble, all kinds of feedback are appreciated. During the last few months, I thoroughly followed the excellent reviews of @MK_Piano on orchestrated scores, so that I hopefully got around with the most obvious pitfalls due to its help. However, there are a number of open questions remaining. I hope, you’ll enjoy the piece. Wieland Episode4-Symphonic-Fugue-B-minor.mp3 Episode4-Symphonic-Fugue-B-minor.pdf

Oh, so I have made the score worse during my revision by removing rests if one instrument plays and the other pauses. By the way, I have found an interesting guideline for score preparation from another composing competition (not the one I intend to participate) which I find useful: https://youngcomposerschallenge.org/preparing_scores.php The respective section is copied in the image. With this example staff line I hopefully have found the correct notation and rest placement for the different situations on a shared staff (in the full orchestral score). In the parts for the individual instruments, that questions do not arise, since there are no shared staves. And, I understood „divisi“ is only for the strings if, for example, the cellos shall play more than one voice in a certain situation. Ok, to avoid those questions, I’ll furthermore use my „beautiful colored scores“ only in my YouTube videos, or perhaps, when presenting a piece here on the YCF for analysis.

There're a lot of great post here in the past and I'm sure they can fill up your belly! Henry

Dear Henry, I’m a bit shy to post the entire piano fugue now here in public. I intend to participate in an external composition competition where the rules say that the work must be „never performed in public and unpublished (even at the author’s own expenses)“ and that „arrangement, transcriptions will not be accepted“ (whatever the latter means). So I consider the original piano work as a „sketch“ for that purpose, from which I’ll take material for the orchestral composition in that competition. I very appreciate, that I have made you curious, so I will use the „send message“ functionality of the YCF to give you access to the original fugue in a „non publishing“ matter.

Hi @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu!! This is an energetic piece that keeps the listener engaged from start to finish. The dynamics are well crafted, and the other instruments really complement the clarinet. I was surprised by the sudden shift at the 3:15 markーit’s inventive. I also like the section around 5:27. The ending is really nice too. The clarinet melody around 1:53 is catchy, too; I imagine its qualities would shine in a live performance. Just picturing a musician bringing out those nuanced dynamics... it would be so wonderful! You’ve created a fantastic piece, well done! Best, Lithl.

Some interesting key changes throughout the piece with fun and playful motives. My favorite part by far is around the 4:20 section. Beautiful melody here shared between the clarinet and the cello with some nice key changing here as well. The fast pace of the scherzo is fun but not overwhelming, especially since you break up the pace a bit especially at around 5:30. BTW, the part at around 5:30 to 5:40 reminds me of Chopin followed by Tchaikovsky! Oh, and 7:30 is a great part as well! I feel like you intertwine your melodies in this section which is definitely more Beethoven-esque. But this is a fantastic movement, I definitely hear influences of your other works in this piece.

Hello you all , it's me here Liaway (this is my nickname/pseudonym to not say my real name) I just recently found this forum which looks like a great ground for feedback and appreciation on my work and I don't know is it on-topic or not but I think my work fits pretty well with Classical music so I'd post it here I'd like some feedback on my work as I am currently 15 Op.2 No.1 Audio (no image) (1).mp3 Op.2 No.1 (Original Cadenza).pdf

This has to be one of my favorite pieces you've written my friend...it's so delicate and tender and perfectly suited to the occasion. Your string voicings work really well to get that full, yet soft sound. Nicely done, my only critique would be the length, I felt the piece could've been longer, but works at the current length, especially for the occasion for which it will be used.

Hi @UncleRed99 ! I forget either lol! I really like this one. It sounds so solemn and very proper for the theme. Thx for sharing! Henry

Hi @Scriabinian ! I feel like the dynamic level of the rendition is unvaried at all! The ff passage sounds the same as mp passages. I have to admit I don't listen to the full piece because of the dynamic level, will you update the post with a more accurate rendition? Looking from the score I think it should be a really beautiful piece featuring rich counterpoint in a Sextet setting! Henry

Hi @Oak ! I agree with @Lithl that the alarm sound doesn't need the percussion. I will go further, I think only the vibraphone will be needed to wake your friends up in a peaceful manner! Henry

Very professional and detailed score. Did you use Dorico? I wonder will you be getting this performed by real musicians?

I see! This helps a lot of understanding. So, the overall fugue is modal, where in this excerpt, we are in Eb/D#-moll and modulate to the next mode for the Fifth Fugue. That makes a lot of sense. To add, yes, I did print on American Letter. With the color engraving, I do not think it is good for performance. The simplest answer I can give to rationalize this, is simply to look at what is currently being printed and published now. No Das wohltemperierte Klavier from Bach is going to be color-coded by Henle, Bärenreiter, or Breitkopf und Härtel for the sake of showing the subjects. It is good for pedagogy and analysis, as printed theory books will include such information. However, not for performance. Anyone who has taken 18th century theory and counterpoint can identify that information with some effort. The other thing about it is the perspective. The only time you may even need to include that info is for study of the entire score... So, when it comes to the conductor, are they going to be the only one to see that information? Are you going to format the parts with extra color for when each instrument has the subject? If a judging panel were going to see it, those questions arise and it would beg the question 'why did this composer feel the need to do this?' When it came to multiple rests, when ever the part is playing, yes, please include the individual voice rests if only one of them is playing. However, when both parts are not playing, only use a single whole rest to show an empty measure. Yet, in the score, you still notate 1. or 2. for when that part is playing. This can be correct, however, at the beginning with the clarinets or trombones, if ONLY one is playing, then please show another rest for the other part that is not playing. This only applies on the score and for the entire duration a voice is playing. For the parts, you would format separate documents for each instrument (two-parts for Trombones, Clarinets, etc. - Four-parts for horns). This said. you DO NOT need to write divisi for any other instrument except the strings. Divisi playing can be notated by the 1. or 2. you are using currently, however any other time should be notated by stem direction and rests, NOT the term divisi. If both parts are playing together, then only show one line of music. Why? because the parts will be separated. A conductor will see the different stem directions and know what those instruments are doing. The exception to this is in concert band/ wind ensemble music. That field sees something like 7 clarinets on one part, and in that case, you can just use numbers and a-due (a2.) to show when the parts are together. In orchestral music, not so much.

Hello @MK_Piano, many thanks for your urgent response and your helpful comments so far! To first give some context and answering the question 8. The Key., the underlying piano composition which I used for the orchestration is a six-part quadruple fugue for piano in B minor – the most complex composition I accomplished so far. It is 18 minutes long and has 360 measures and literally modulates to all 24 keys during its journey. I have chosen for the orchestration example, the fourth episode which is a modulating section from D# minor (wherein the fourth development section ends) to D major (which is the starting key of the fifth development section). Therefore, we have no B minor in this excerpt, but rather the modulation from Eb minor via C minor, A minor/A phrygian and finally by the C# diminished seventh chord to D major. Hupps, just as I’m typing that and wondering why you talk about a C# half diminished while I was sure that it is a C# diminished seventh, I see a typo in the last measure: in the piano original we have a B-flat but I have taken over a B-natural. However it also sounds good and I did not notice this mistake while listening, but I think, I’ll fix it. I just haven’t presented the entire piano fugue on YCF nor published it on YouTube yet (fortunately), so I came around with the – hopefully not too megalomaniacal – idea to use that material as the „sketch“ for an external composition competition. Therefore, again, many thanks for your comments, they will help me with this adventure. Sadly, I’m – if I participate in that contest – under „embargo“ concerning the material of the fugue I will use. 1. Page Margins. I also printed it and it has sufficient margins. Your troubles might have been caused since the PDF is in A4-format (as usual in Europe) and you probably tried to print it on an American printer? A full orchestral score on A4 is challenging, and one has to be very stingy with the space, but other commonly used formats for orchestral scores are not printable on a home or office printer and the contest’s request was also to use A4. 2. Having multiple colors within the engraving. I usually apply that colored annotations in fugues to highlight the subject entries, and I think it is helpful for analysis (thus, I use it in my videos and also when sharing pieces on the YCF). However, it is clear to me that a score intended for performance is only black and white. However, what do you think, would judges in a competition appreciate such a colored, analytical score, additionally? 3. Clefs and 4. Rests. I corrected the clefs with ottava numbers for Piccolo, Glockenspiel, Tuba and Contrabass as well as replaced the rests with centered whole rests whenever an entire measure is empty. 5. Rests again. Even if I have not yet seen your annotations, I guess that the suspected rests are merely those whenever two instruments share one staff. In this cases, whenever there are two voices on one staff, I often engraved the rests for both voices explicitely. But to make the score much more clearer, I suppose, you would suggest to apply that procedure only for the „divisi“ sections and in the other cases, if either only one instrument plays, or both in unison, to have only rests for the entire staff and not for each individual voice. 6. THE HARP. Yes, I have taken over as many as possible from the piano part to the harp, although I just had to make some simplifications concerning what notes are playable at one time (with a distinct pedal setting). I know that harpists are using only four fingers, therefore there are only „chords“ with maximum three notes in each staff. However, I suppose that you find some ninth intervals unplayable (while my online resources say that large intervals up to tenths would be playable using the thumb and the ring/fourth finger). What I perhaps could do, is to simplify the harp part - meaning to get rid from the (remainder of the) six-part voice leading in the piano score, and to notate all (or at least the most) notes to be played as quarter notes. I suppose, there is no big difference between a quarter note, a half or even a whole or tied note, as the length of the sounding is determined inherently by the instrument and there is no explicit damping required (as in the piano part, there are also long passages with sustain pedal). 7. Harp Pedals. I replaced the pedal diagram with letters (which is also much better readable for me ...). Episode4-Symphonic-Fugue-B-minor-revision1.pdf

Still so happy how the flute solo at b.76 sounds ;) Glad I could be of assistance, with both, what we referred to as the "Brass Hymnal" sections, and with the C Section of the piece. I had fun being involved in the process, directly :)

You know, with the score being two years old, and my experience also being two years younger at the time, I just assumed the horn staves were already formatted correctly as they are for all my scores/ templates now. That was an oversight by me due to complacency. C-trumpets are the preferred instrument for orchestral settings compared to the Bb-trumpet. Why? I am unsure the specific reason/ evolution to that answer, however, I know it is industry standard now to see C-trumpets in a vast number of orchestral works. Trumpets in D, Eb, and Bb are some of the exceptions with Bb being the other most common. I used for that reason and because I wanted C-trumpet for it's slightly brighter character compared to Bb. To add, the instrumentation lists Four Trumpets split between two parts (2+2 for volume). With the standard of 3 distinct parts over two staves, I kept the parts limited to two for simplicity when it came to orchestrating. That was done two years ago when I created the piece and I just kept it the same now. Lastly, I did not pair the woodwind staves together as they have very distinct parts between all the winds. Trying to condense them onto a single stave felt like a cluster-bomb I was not willing to tackle. Thus, having them explicit and separated establishes a strong clarity for what the part is doing. To add, as I have printed an earlier draft of this score once before, the pdf makes it feel smaller than what you will see physically. I do not think the measure/ part size will be an issue. Thanks for pointing out the horn parts, I will fix that immediately!

Hi @MK_Piano ! What a wonderful steam railway adventure you've created! I think it will fit right in with similar train-themed repertoire in the catalogue such as the Copenhagen Steam Railway Galop and Pacific 231. I love the spirit of the piece! The brass Eb major 6/9 chords do a wonderful job of mimicking the train whistle! I didn't even realize what chord that was until I heard this piece. The melodic variations and modulations keep the piece fresh and the modulation to Db major is a well conceived and welcome one! The descending Eb, D, C, Bb figure is a really great ostinato that puts me in a chugging mood! LoL I know you're a stickler to score engraving so I don't have much critique there except that usually the Horns are paired 1&3 and 2&4 on each staff. Also, I'm surprised that you used C Trumpets - and only two of them? When I played trumpet, Bb trumpet was still the standard and I'd expect 3 in the orchestra to be available. Also, any reason why you didn't group the woodwinds two to a staff? It would save a lot of space on the page. Those are just my minor critiques. Thanks again for your recent help on my Christmas Mash-up!!!

If someone would have written this for my wedding, I would've cried. It's so beautiful. Thanks for sharing. That's all I have to say.

Ollo! I will be looking at this score soon and giving some feedback. To preface some the explicit comments I will make, there are still a lot of engraving errors within the score. 1. Page Margins. I tried printing the score from my Google Browser and it increased the page margins of your document/ made the score smaller to fit the page. I would increase the margins by default. 2. Having multiple colors within the engraving. I can understand doing this for pedagogy or analysis, however, for publishing and performance, do not add multiple colors UNLESS it is for specific reason (i.e. Contemporary/ experimental music). 3. Clefs. Glockenspiel does not read a 15ma Treble Clef. Tuba does not read in 8vb Bass Clef. Piccolo does not read 8va Treble Clef. They all read the normal versions of the clefs, however, the concert/ sounding pitch may be in those ranges. 4. Rests. Even in 6/4, 3/2, or 5/4, an empty measure is represented by a singular whole rest, not the dotted whole rest. To add, in the current version of the score, they are all offset. An empty measure needs to have its rest centered on the bar. 5. Rests again. I will make specific annotations of this comment. 6. THE HARP. The harp is not a piano, and comparing to your Piano score, it feels like you dragged piano elements to the harp. To emphasize some of their differences, harpists DO NOT use their pinkies when playing. So, some intervals or passages/ groupings of notes, can become impractical if you just copied it from a piano part. 7. Harp Pedals. They do not need a pedal diagram for every change. A simple, and clearly placed letter will be enough to show which pedal to change. To add, most harpists will just write one in if you only pedal charts. It's visually redundant for performance (in my experience) 8. The Key. Your Title says B-minor, then you open the piece in Eb-minor and end it on a C# half-diminished chord. So... which is it? Are we really in B-minor? I didn't see the key signature for this mode at all. (I have not done any harmonic analysis at the time of this comment) I will highlight some of these comments over the next day or two, however, let these serve as some food for thought. Good work!

Here's the first bit. The rest will come in about ten days' time. See what you think. I wish I were still at high school - I'm much older though still lively, I hope. JSWRM Pericles.pdf

I don't use DAWs , my main music notation app is MuseScore , also the section that you mentioned as a bit repetitive is my attempt on a tocatta and also I am not formally trained musically as I mainly go to online sources for music theory The reason why I marked Opp. is because it is a bunch of other works that would be transcribed into solo piano Anyways , thankies for the feedback

Oh, just another competition, while I am just a little bit exhausted of the previous one, so that I – while following the poll – even missed to vote at time … As the more „restricted“ suggestions for the competition’s subject did not win, we now (once again) have a more „free“ one: „From Nothing, to Something“. I must admit that I am currently in the state of „Nothing“ ☹️, but hopefully there will be „Something“ within the next few weeks 😊. That’s why I’m declaring my intention to participate in the competition - even if I can’t make any firm promises.

Hello, @Liaway! Welcome to the Young Composers Forum! Just to start, this topic is dedicated to piano and keyboard works, so while you'll see a lot of classical pieces here, it's perfectly fine to post anything that fits the instrumentation. Don't worry, your work is a great fit for this space! You'll probably receive detailed feedback later from composers who are far more knowledgeable than I am, but I’d like to share a few thoughts of my own first. My first impression was that this is a really gorgeous and nice piece. It has a rich, full sound, and I enjoyed listening to it, especially the first section. I also liked the interesting progression in the section starting at 10:48. On the other hand, the volume balance in the part starting at 2:28 and around 5:15 stood out to me; it felt extremely quiet. I found the section from around 6:52 to 10:40 a bit repetitive—honestly, it started to feel a little tedious. It feels like there are so many ideas packed in that being a bit more selective could really help the piece come together better. Of course, that’s just my personal preference. Also, overall, it seems like you're still getting the hang of handling articulations in your DAW. It can be bothersome work, but since it's a piano piece, simply tweaking those details could create a much deeper, better listening experience. Then again, that’s just something that comes with practice. Oh, and one small thing—the title in the topic header is listed as "Opp." :) Well, I wasn't even composing when I was 15... so the fact that you can create something like this at that age is amazing. I’m not in the music industry myself, so I can't say for sure, but it seems like you have a very high level of skill in composition for your age. I guess you have studied music formally, maybe. Anyway, I’ve pointed out a few things, but I think the piece itself is great! There are many wonderful people in this forum, so I hope you enjoy it! Best, Lithl.

Here are some songs and lyrics. Some are from comedy shows and not suitable for Renaissance or Baroque modes but they give you an idea of my diversity of work. I'll work on 'Pericles' and 'Titus' over the next few days (though I shall be away for four days next week) and could send you a libretto for either in a couple of weeks' time, if you wish. You may not like either but it would be worth looking to see. Best regards, Richard Poems and Songs by Richard Moore.pdf