rbasilio

Thanks everyone for the comments! joshtsai, This was actually intended for sit down concert band, although it was influenced a lot by marching music. It would be interesting and not at all implausible to turn it into a marching arrangement, but if I did so, I'd definitely rearrange it to handle woodwinds differently, especially with the loss of oboe and bassoon.

I wasn't trying to be overly mean in my post. I did post what I do not like about some music I hear, though I also tried to not use over-generalizations. As in, I tried to avoid saying things like it should *always* this way, *never* this way, etc. I've heard some music "without melodies" that have sounded pretty cool, but I've also heard a lot that sounded really bad. In the drum and bugle corps world today, for example, there's a lot of corps that play "intellectual" music, music that's not immediately catchy or anything like that. And I personally hate it. Sure, it's technically clean, and all that, but the audience doesn't get it, and I would bet the ensemble doesn't always get it either. In some situations, this can be ok, but in other settings, like this one for example, it's not the point. As for instrumentation. What my point was, is that sometimes what might seem like a cool idea, because it's theoretically possible, can turn out to be a horrible idea because players cannot handle it with any proficiency. Sometimes, sure, try it. You just don't always have to push that part just because you can. I've written music that pushes instruments, plenty of times. But I've also learned that sometimes, it can result in a disaster, after seeing musicians take the music I had written and actually tried to play it. Some brilliant masterpieces push the limits of what an instrument can do. So, my point is, know what your players can do, then decide if you want push that or not. It's just like most anything in composition, you should know the "rules" first, even if you decide to break all of them anyway. I've heard some "weird" music that I like, that steps outside the box. Holsinger and Bernstein are two that come to mind for wacky, yet amazing music. Then there's other music that's wacky, and that's it, and for the most part, I'm not interested in it. So what I said is not an end-all statement. I've heard exceptions to everything I said that I legitimately enjoyed. As per topic, I mentioned things I've heard from composers that personally really bothered me. It was not meant to hateful or spiteful, and I apologize if you got that intention.

I agree with most of the one said so far, but here goes... Just because it doesn't have a melody people can sing to, or a melody at all, doesn't always mean it's more complicated or intellectual. It could be that it just sucks. Understand your players. Just because it's theoretically possible for the players to do something doesn't always mean they should. Once in awhile, it's ok to do the expected thing. Sure, making your music go somewhere unexpected can be interesting and very cool, but doing it all the time and never doing *anything* expected not only takes away interest from all the unexpected things, it gets frustrating and annoying. Along the same lines, know when to resolve your chords. I won't name any compositions in particular, but I've had to play pieces where it was going along fine and (relatively) enjoyable, when it ends on a dissonant chord, which completely ruined the strong 40 measure long build-up. Really? Know when you've reached the end of your idea. It doesn't always have to be 15-30 minutes long. If you've got 5 minutes worth of ideas in your head, write 5 minutes, not 20.

Very cool. I can't offer much in the way of critique, none that you've probably heard at least. The only thing I can think of in way of critique is that you could probably add to the piece after J, just cause it seemed to end a little abruptly. Also, as a horn player, I was a little curious (not critique, just wondering) why the horn solo at G is on horn 2? I can see a few reasons why, I was just wondering what your reasoning was. Other than that, great piece! Enjoyed it very much.

An energetic and lively piece for concert band. Features a baritone soloist. Awakening

I'm not really sure either. Given your notes, it could be a German 6th chord, but with the major 7th added. German 6th is a major triad with an augmented 6th, which can explain your Ab, C, Eb, and F#. Then just throw in the G for fun?

Most of the time for me, I create a melody first, then add the harmony. Often times though, I can hear the harmony at the same time I hear the melody, I just happen to put the melody first because it's easier for me to tweak to the way I want.

Thanks! I definitely agree about the transition. I admit, that was the hardest part for me to write, just because I couldn't find a way to make it sound exactly the way I wanted. For the oboe part, it just happened to be due to circumstances. I wrote this piece with my high school symphonic band in mind, as my band director had promised me that if I finished it, they would look at and even possibly perform it at our spring concert (which we did. It was awesome getting to hear my music played live, as well as taught me a lot of things of what to do and not do!) So, the piece was also in part set around our strengths and weaknesses, and part of that was that we did not have an oboe player. So, I decided not to write one. A few months later, my brother (who happens to be an oboe player) suggested I write one in, but I have so far avoided doing so just because I felt I had arranged the parts where I wanted it, and didn't have the time to do any drastic changes. If I ever decide to go back and make some revisions to this piece, which I probably will eventually, I'll definitely keep this in mind! Thanks again!

Awesome, both links! :D I've often composed by the 5th rule, but I usually felt a little bad about it, like I might be breaking some high rule up there I had never discovered in my 4 semester's worth of non-music major music theory 1 and 2 classes! As for the first link, I have a music video related to that, though it may be misnamed. I'll put in another topic though to stay on topic. :)

Definitely. Although sometimes, the composer might really need that one part, just because a player can theoretically play a tied whole note the entire piece, switch between different effects, for wind players play on their high range the entire piece with little to no rests, doesn't mean they should.

Note for reviewers: I wrote this piece two years ago, so many of the weaknesses of this piece have hopefully since then been learned from. The structure of this piece remains because I felt that any logistical or preferential problems, things that weren't actually wrong with the piece, were not worth a total renovation of the entire piece. However, as this was my first composition for a large ensemble, any feedback is greatly appreciated! Also, I apologize for having not become more a part of the community before uploading this. I was unaware of this rule when I uploaded, but I do intend to become involved. =)

A piece for Concert Band telling the story of a battle in the American Revolutionary War. The piece begins in a peaceful field, introducing the main theme. Then, the sound of drums are heard, before the British Army arrives to the tune of "British Grenadiers." Soon, the American Army also arrives, to the tune of "Yankee Doodle," and the tension builds. The battle between the two armies then ensues. When the battle is over, the smoke is too thick to tell the victor. However, a beam of light shines through, and the smoke begins to clear, with the Patriots as the victors. Patriot Dream