penguinsbyc

Well, the whole point of a composition degree would be to beef up your skills in all areas, so you know what you are doing. Trust me, they will not want you to write SOLELY for orchestra/large ensembles. That would be totally impractical performance-wise. What they WILL do, however, is force you to write for various ensembles. Don't be afraid of writing for something you're not used to writing for. You never know unless you try. The degree is not in "piano composition", but "composition" itself. The program (should) prepare you for all sorts of groups that you might have to (or want to) write for. In terms of the style, I don't believe any good program would force a particular style upon you. The higher level school, such as Julliard, might push for it, but then just don't go there. Find a program and a teacher that will encourage your own growth and talents. This being said, don't be turned off because of exploration! You might find a niche in minimalism, or serialism. And unless you actually compose pieces in this style (under the guidance of a good teacher) you will never know whether or not you enjoy that style. So to answer your question would you have trouble getting in? Probably not too much. Unless you are going for a very "prestigious" school, you should be fine. You go there to learn, they certainly don't expect you to be a Corigliano or Xenakis. Remember, the opportunity of a degree is to learn and be exposed to as many things as possible. Keep an open ear and take in all the influences you can get. Just out of curiosity, what gave you this impression of universities?

Nice piece! Yeah, I would highly recommend putting sections down the octave. Specifically measures 28-44. It would be hard enough to play once, but the repeat (and the lack of breaths/rest) makes that section darn near impossible to play. All the rest is pretty doable by a good player. I would be a little less willing to go into the stratosphere in the coming movements, not only for the poor player, but also for a sense of direction. High notes on a trumpet are POWERFUL!! and are best used in a climactic moment. Of course, there are a million and one exceptions to this rule, but it is something to think about. Along those same lines, I didn't feel much of a high point in the piece. There was no direction or arrival point. There was a bit at the end, and that might be what you were going for, however a good scheduled climax always makes me happy. I really did enjoy this piece, actually. It was very nice to listen to and had some very cool ideas. Keep it up, I look forward to hearing more!

In all respects, I am going to present this thread with a humble and merciful bump. I plan to send this in to a contest and I would like to request some (more) criticism. Bring your worst. Thank you all!

I''ll start off by offering the my side to the parallel fifths argument. Those "rules" everyone is discussing, applies only to the music of common-practice origin. Despite common belief, a parallel fifth will not result in the death of the world, bags of kittens being thrown in the river, nor mountains of hate mail in your mailbox. Just ask Debussy :toothygrin:. In reality, there are no rules. The only restriction to music is that you think it sounds good. That being said, the harmonic materials in your piece suggest more of a common-practice based palette. You should take into consideration the sounds that the parallel fifths bring to the piece. Are they working towards the overall goal of the piece, or against it? Other things... You are putting the sopranos up the octave seemingly at random. Huge gaps (especially those grater than an octave) in the melodic line are generally frowned upon, and make the piece harder to perform than what it should be. What is the purpose of the high C at the end? Just because? Although I enjoy some of the word painting in this piece, the text itself doesn't seem to fit in the overall scope of the music. As I read the poem over, the words seem to describe the realization that death is inevitable, and that everything continues on, regardless of the death of an individual. Its a brutal reality, but one that I don't feel is conveyed in the piece as much as it could be. A greater focus upon the last two lines I feel would give more weight to that meaning of the text. Finally, I would like to see a clear climax in this piece. Know where the music is going to, so the work as a whole is more coherent. All in all, I do think this does have quite a bit of potential. Take these suggestions into account, if you'd like, and apply them in all aspects of your composing. There were parts I thoroughly enjoyed, and I am looking forward to hearing your music again. Best of luck.

Thank you for the comments! Yeah, I do have to admit that some of the sections are a little disjointed from the rest of the piece. I wish I could've fixed that before I sent it in to a contest.... Oh well :D Thanks!

Here's a new piece I recently churned out. Its for solo Alto Sax and piano. It loosely follows a ternary form. From the conception of the piece, I knew I wanted something a little more dissonant and more jazz influence than some of my other pieces. From there I relied on the blues and octatonic scale for a lot of my melodic materials. The title comes from a phrase that developed in the history of magnetism. In an attempt to give reason to the fact that the earth was magnetic, it was proclaimed to have a "magnetic soul" This was, frankly, just too awesome of a title to pass up. Although the piece is not intended to be programmatic, you are welcome to draw from it what you like. Well, I don't have much else to say. Enjoy! MP3 (please notice cadenza does not play back correctly) Finale 2007c - [Alto-piano]NoName.pdf

Cool piece. Cool text. Nice! My main concern is the abrupt switch to clusters at "overflowing" Maybe its just me, but the harmony there doesn't seem to fit with the rest of the music. It seems like you laid out some common-practice harmonic structure, then promptly went to cluster-chords. Don't get me wrong, I adore the sound of a great cluster, and I love the build up in the piece, however, I'm not too sure If its on the same wavelength with the rest of the music. Likewise, the chromatic movement downward at the climax also didn't feel like it was within the scope of this piece. The individual sections work on their own, but when put together, it's a bit weird. Also, the build up was tremendous, but I felt kind of let down at the "Light" moment. It didn't seem nearly explosive enough for me. That IS the climax, and I'm left feeling cheated. All in all, nice piece. Especially for a few hours. Gosh I wish my current piece would come that easy...

Well, the motion only completely stops twice, and never for too long. I don't actually mean to classify it as a tried and true "moto perpetuo" I guess where I was going with the title was more of the direct translation of "Perpetual Motion" and not the history of the form. That being said, I'm always open to new ideas. The only reason it is called moto perpetuo is because I couldn't think of any other good names...

Actually, I think the recording is pretty good for a sight reading session... If it makes you feel any better, a piece of mine was sight read by a community college band, and they sent me a recording you can listen to here. Definitely not perfect at all, so don't think that it's your piece that's messed up. The idea is not to get discouraged because of a high school sight reading session. I quite enjoyed your piece, and I think that, given a little more time in rehearsal, It would sound phenomenal played by your group. Will you band director allow you to perform the piece, or at least dedicate a bit of time to learning it? That's the best way to go. Good luck! -Corey

Alright, neat piece. I can totally see the bell aspect you are trying to bring out, and I think the amount of repetition you use is tasteful. Enough that I get the picture, but not too much to bore me, good job. First thing, I have to echo those above me. Text hardly ever appears and fits perfectly. Next time, I'd have a text first and derive the music from that. It creates more of a unified piece, and the words have more relation to the music. It also opens up the idea of word painting. If there is a particular word used, you can model the harmonic language used to match the wording. An example would be if the word is "light" make the chord sparkly and major. If the text you find stumbles on the word "horrific" make the chord hopeless, ect... Just an idea. :D I also noticed, there doesn't appear to be a clear climax in the piece. There are swells, but never a point where the walls come crashing down. Maybe its an individual thing, but I don't see death as very subdued. A point of climax would be a nice addition to the reflective textures that you have here. Next time, I might be a little more conservative on your soprano ranges, or at least let them have a bit notice before spring high B's out of nowhere. Also, a quick notation issue. Anytime you have a voice sing more than one note on the same syllable, those notes need to be slurred. An example would be at measure 30 on "et" Besides that, I think you have a lovely piece here Best of Luck! -Corey

...how many "almost large" orchestras do you know of? How many would play a piece by an unknown composer? Not too many. I would try and get it performed, but don't' expect it will happen. It would be a good idea to write for some smaller ensembles, learn more concerning orchestration, and get some performances! That's how you improve and "make it" Also, large orchestration does not make a piece great. Some of the best music ever written has been for no more than 8 people! What about Bach, Chopin, Debussy, Schoenberg, Reich! I could go on forever, but you get the point. Open your mind a bit... Good Luck

UPDATE, the band finally gave me a recording. More explained in the first post (which is now updated with a link) Thanks!

Update 2/08/09! I have updated the MIDI file as well as the PDF file on the initial post. Also, an MP3 link is now available!

Wow, uhh yeah, the entire horn part should be taken down the octave. Phew that's high. Thats from This Orchestration thread by QcCowboy. Its an awesome thread. Good read. Anyway, high C's are a bad idea, done with that. As for the rest of the music, I'll just make a few suggestions that might help with this piece, as you review over it... First of all, unison is cool, however it gets a bit boring after so long. Some harmony in the "A" section would be awesome! Likewise, I'm not feeling too much of a central melody in the "B" section, which would really help tie the section together, as well as allow for the listener to feel special. "Hey! Thats a melody!!!" And we always want to listener to feel special. Also sort of along the same lines, the harmony in the "B" section can be spiced up. It's pretty much all just whole notes. Some moving notes and changing harmony would spice the entire piece up a lot! Finally, in the repeat of the "A" section at the end of the piece, bring something new to the mix! No one wants to hear EXACTLY the same thing, so throw a bit of a curveball for the listener. Make them focus on the piece and not just zone out. So that's about it for now. It's coming along nicely!

Thanks for the comments! I don't mean to make your comments invalid, or for that matter appear ungrateful, but I'm just going to explain why I made things the way they are. Measure 17 beat 4: Yes, its probably the midi, but I intended the octave jump by the sopranos to be jarring. Setting up the next few bars where things get dissonant quickly. Measures 33-38 are a word painting on my part. The text references the moon, and I tried to convey that sort of lunar, mysterious quality with my choice of chords. Measures 47-49 are supposed to be a huge dramatic build up to the point of climax. In other words, I want them to scream (metaphorically speaking, not actual screaming) In terms of the bass interval-jumps, I am writing for a good quality collegiate choir so..they can handle it. Also, I think voices treat dissonances quite well, I rather enjoy me some good sung dissonance. In all honesty I have heard some amazing choir works with really painful dissonances that just blew me away. Maybe its a personal taste? All of this is just me explaining what I was trying to do with the piece. Like I said before, I'm still very grateful for the comments and I will keep them in mind as I set out to revise the piece Thanks a lot!!!