danishali903

I've been playing violin/viola for over 20 years now and I still find it hard to describe harmonics, lol. There's like a whole physics lecture behind them and most of it goes over my head Basically, there are two kinds of string harmonics: natural and artificial. In short, natural harmonics occur when the player lightly touches a point on the string to produce the harmonic tone. These are a little confusing to notate since what one might see on the page isn't necessarily the pitch heard. I In the example above, it's basically telling the player to lightly touch the note where the player would normally play the E on the open G string. This will produce the B harmonic (as notated in the parenthesis). Some composers might just notate the diamond note on the E, and not have the G...players will know what to do. . Artificial harmonics are a little easier to notate. In the example above, you're telling the player to press the string (in this case the G string...the IV means G string...but the B notated is only possible on the G string so it's redundant) with the 1st finger (the index finger), and then lightly touch with their pinky finger a fourth above (if the player presses hard with their pinky finger, the note produced will be an E). The resulting pitch will be a B, but a harmonic that sounds 2 octaves higher than notated. These perfect 4th harmonics are pretty much standard in orchestral repertoire and will always produce the lower regular note 2 octaves higher than notated. Obviously, you can't do these harmonics on open strings, there always has to be a stopped note. Both examples above will produce the same B harmonic. The natural harmonic might be easier for players to play/find. Hopefully that made sense!

Errr...probably still won't work. It would be better to keep all those runs within the same instrument family (strings or winds). This reminds of a passage in Brahms' 1st Piano Quartet where the piano has a mini cadenza towards the end: https://youtu.be/uwAQ7zVM6sE?si=HpAKiiDPOwnDPdHC&t=2285 Arnold Schoenberg eventually orchestrated this piece and had a clever take on this passage: https://youtu.be/7wzJluXJ5H8?si=th4OTUQ7RTSntfSD&t=2422 The Fauré passage is bit different in character, but I think Schoenberg has a good example of something you can try. Maybe give those runs to a 2 clarinets: 1 Eb for the higher pitches, and 1 regular Bb clarinet. They'll be sitting close to each other, and would easily blend in to each others' runs and timbre. The violin/piccolo combo would be too jarring in tonal color, and the fact on stage they'll be separated by a few feet, making the coordination really difficult.

True. There definitely will be some comments made though lol. Also, Rachmaninoff’s symphony is in the friendly key of E Minor, not E Flat minor.

Looking at that key is giving me anxiety....orchestral players are not gonna love it. I wasn't familiar with the piano piece so I did take a listen to it to compare. I'm not a fan of the faster tempo marking....I think it zaps away the "nocturnal" feeling and feels more like a slow waltz at the faster tempo. Also, the piece as written by Faure is so idiomatic for the piano, that it invites tempo fluctuations/rubato that will be hard to capture in an orchestration without clear guidance in the score. And with that awful key!!!! Orchestrating this is a challenge. There is a lot of over reliance on woodwinds here....especially in the beginning. Without slurs and phrasing markings in the score and audio, it sounds a little sterile. Also wind players have to breathe....that flute line from the beginning to A is gonna be tough. Also, a lot of awkward writing in general (comments above already have highlighted some of these). Example below of the bassoons/contrabassoon before A...contrabassoon part seems wasted on high random notes, and the 64th rest (I think?) right before A in the 1st bassoon is dangerous: I think there are certain figures that can be better suited for string players: The figure above might be better for the cellos to play (with proper slurring and articulation written in). Measures 23-29 can be given to the upper strings. I think in general you have to be a little more creative with your orchestral colors. The whole thing from 86-93 is not good in my opinion. This is where you have to get REALLY creative to orchestrate that cadenza, and the way it is written now....having 12-14 first violinists play those fast notes (in that very ugly key) and then dovetailing to one piccolo player and back is not going to sound good. I think @Luis Hernández said it best in his comment: it is a little to literal "transcription" of the original piano work. It definitely needs a lot of creative changing to translate it to have an orchestra tackle it.

Having read the program notes page, I think you capture the atmosphere of some of the themes (ie. betrayal, turbulence) you mentioned. It would be interesting to hear the rest of the soundtrack to see how the themes/motifs you have here develop. Though, I gotta be honest...film scores lately have a very generic sound to them and this (for me anyways) falls in that category. Some things musical things from the score I noticed: The way these harmonics are notated is confusing. I'm saying that as a string player. Some 2nd violinists might think you want an open E string, which I'm pretty sure you don't want. If these are actual sounding pitches, the 1st violinist would have an easier time understanding these notations (one is a natural harmonic, the other is an artificial....don't really have a preference): The 2nd violin note (if that is the sounding pitch) is impossible to play as a harmonic on a violin. As I said, players would probably play an open E string. The viola one looks alright, it'll be a natural harmonic on the G string. Saw this in the score a couple of times. Wondering if you could move the pp before the barline to avoid those awkward looking measures with rests. Overall, there seems to be over-reliance on doublings between instrument groups. E to the end is the prime example. I think most of the wind/brass instruments can drop out at 47 for a quieter ending. Also that section felt a little...static? Could use some more rhythmic drive (maybe bring back the bass guitar/cello figure from the beginning?) or just some counterpoint.

That's a lot of info dumping...with very valid comments from @Kvothe and @MK_Piano. I am curious if this specific piece was requested by a 3rd party or did you create for your own learning/pleasure? I'm also not understanding your answer to @MK_Piano's question of how you write your pieces? You mentioned keyboard...do you input the notes and everything using that keyboard? Or it does it come with pre-rendered samples and you just mash them together? I'm a noob when it comes to electronic music... As for the piece of music here, it's alright. It's catchy but repetitive and generic. Not really sure how it ties to Alaska...if you didn't have the video posted, I would've chalked it up to random elevator music. If what you say is true about how the media industry works, it's a shame that the craft of a music making to tell the story pioneered by legends such as Korngold, Newman, Williams, etc. is dead.

This is quite charming! I would love to see a score of the parts that are orchestrated. If I had no context and turned on the radio and this was playing, I would've honestly thought this was a Strauss waltz. That's probably my biggest gripe with this. I think it's suppose to be an homage to the Strauss Viennese Waltz, but it lacks originality or a unique take on the genre.

It would be really cool to hear a large string orchestra play this piece. A couple of comments: It's a bit static and on the short side. I think more development of the melodic material, or even an another theme (that's a little more "active") can help with that. There is a lot of unconvincing, but slightly interesting voice leading and harmonic clashes going on. Some of the transitional chords really random and don't set up the next phrase like they should (most prominent example is bars 39-40 going into 41). It would it make more interesting to have the lower strings have a more active part than just holding on to half notes. The violins don't always have to play the melody, share it with the others! Try to be more creative in writing for parts that are accompanying the melody.

Probably more of a visual reminder to bang on that note...might've overdone it with those markings

Thanks for the comments, Alex! The piccolo will sound an octave higher than written, so technically it is still pitched above the flutes. I agree! I tried figuring out how to do this in Dorico but couldn't figure it out without it looking weird (hence my note). The "vertical" accents denote Marcato. My interpretation is that they are played stronger than your regular accent and are slightly shorter in duration (a half note maybe played as a dotted quarter perhaps)...each note with the Marcato marking needs to be hammered and short-ish. Err...I guess that is subjective and depends on the context of what else is going on in the score. sffz definitely is more "hammered" than sfz

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

I agree here with @Luis Hernández. The music is so static that you have to get really creative to orchestrate it. Some comments: As a string player, the long slurs in the slow tempo are going to be near impossible. Try playing around with bowings to match phrasing Not sure if you're familiar with this, but Debussy already orchestrated this piece. You'll see he adds a few things here and there to keep things interesting and fresh: https://youtu.be/zbMhQjBSHvs?si=dDWWwCFhyTTcyVIs&t=188 You'll notice in the recording that the harp arpeggiates the chords to keep things flowing. Also, your lower strings (violas, celli, bass) are going to hate you for writing such a boring part! But again, the music is so static that you'd have to get really creative to do that without ruining the meditative atmosphere....very tricky!

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

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

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