panta rei

Hello Peter. Thanks a lot for your reply. I was not sure about the upper range of the trumpet,( I know very little of this instrument) and I am glad to learn that the high C is not a problem. I am sorry for not mentioning my software notation program (it is Sibelius). But finally I managed to convert to quadruplets. It escaped my attention that there is a special plug-in file, which allowed me to make the changes. Thanks anyway for your help! (I have now uploaded the revised version of the score). My way of writing changes periodically. The last two pieces were in the way you described, but I have some other things which are quite different in form. And again, thanks a lot for your feedback and your help.

Hi, Several years ago, I wrote the piece “Crossroad” (I wanted to indicate the point where I started writing something different), but the score as well as some of the music was in a terrible state. Recently, I have made a revised version, which I am posting here. There are still some items which could be improved, but I think that the piece is now something which is closer in line with my original idea. But I would like to point out the following issues: l) The rhythm is maybe not exactly that of an original Habanera. I have decided on a short duration (a staccatissimo) on the second beat of the 2/4 measures. However, the sound of these beats should not be lifted too much, otherwise it will become boring. 2) In bars 21,22,25,26,29,30 as well as 55, I had a notation problem with the trumpet voice. I tried to write quadruplets, but the software did not accept my suggestions. However, it is important that the rhythm is played the way as in the sound file. I would appreciate if someone can help me to get a better notation. 3) The trumpet part may be quite challenging (for example the high notes in 29-30). Do you think that it is playable? 4) The cadenza-like part (bar 62-74) is a bit “wild”. I recorded it from a separate improvisation on my piano, and then tried to mirror it in a score. Of course, alternative cadenzas would also be possible. But it is important to observe that the purpose of this cadenza is to get a pronounced distance between the first part of the piece and the repetition, which starts in bar 78. 5) Otherwise, I am quite happy with it. There may be some additional score issues (e.g. enharmonic spelling errors), and I would be very grateful if you can suggest me corrections.

Thank you Mark and Louis for your comments. I think, Louis, that the fixed waltz rhythm is OK, but I always have a problem with electronic playback. The third beat in the 3/4 rhythm is often too strong (or rather, there is a lack of variation in sound strength). Also,some rubato here and there could be beneficial. Quote

Hello Henry, Thanks a lot for your review! I am actually quite satisfied with this piece, but I have been thinking about your comment regarding the middle section. I don´t think that it is too long, but there may be a need for some structural changes. I don´t have a good alternative for the moment, but I will try to find a better solution. Best regards. Johan

Here is a short piece, which I wrote recently. It is in a Chopin-like style. I have not made any pedal indications, because most musicians would probably want to decide on this themselves. But I could add them of course. I would be very interested to learn what you think of the piece.

Jackie, this is really beautiful! The style, the harmonization, the mood, and your playing- It is all perfect! And I love the simplicity of your piece. Chopin once said that one should strive to write simple music (and so he did). When listening to you music, I was almost urged to add a voice line to it, and arrange it into a song. What do you think about this idea? Thanks again for posting this wonderful piece

Hello Henry This is an impressive composition and I really enjoyed that you performed it yourself. This is quite demanding but you managed very well to play it. I listened to it several times and will try to give you my impressions. This work is coherent and well structured, with the primary melody present in most of the piece. But I think that it is often a bit heavy, particularly the part after the second melody. The thick repetitive structure of chords (in bar 86 and 98) as well as many of the fast running arpeggio´s can work OK, but attract too much attention, and obscure rather than enhance the melody awareness. I would try to avoid too many of such embellishments, unless they have a very clear purpose (I should not really say this because I make this kind of mistake too often myself). A very beautiful part starts from bar 39 (typically Chopin-type style).Also the music in bar 56-59 is very good - great work! In bar 60-63, I can unmistakably identify your personal style. After a rather complex narrative, there are nice resolutions in bar 89 (and also in 101), and a pleasant and clear return to the primary melody ( but things remain still a bit heavy). The sudden interruption of the melody line after bar 126 evoked a bit of a question. I did not quite understand the idea. And the arpeggiated chords in 129-130 were too “thick” for my taste. The start of a Coda in 138 is nice and should perhaps be noted as tenuto (at least this is the way you seem to play it, and I like it). In the ending of bar 142, I would prefer a simplification, by just using the top E, instead of the diads in the groups of 4 notes (and everything played pp). The overlay repetitive pentatonic style is not my cup of tea, but OK, this is just me. It is more a question of personal taste. When looking at the score, I found some other (minor) things which I would do differently: 1) In bar 4 of the preamble, I would replace the half note (C-sharp) and the E (with the fermata), with three quavers: C sharp – E and F-sharp, (played slower of course and adjusted with an appropriate metre) . I think it would provide a nicer transition to the subsequent start of the melody. 2) The augmentation from the B to a C in bar 8 (and also bar 16) in the l.h.chords seems unnecessary to me. It detracts the attention on the melody In the case of bar 12, the situation is quite the opposite. Here, the augmentation is excellent! 3) In bar 14 (and also bar 30), the last two quaver chords in the l.h.are a bit jarring for me. 4) In bar 26, I would change the last r.h. diad to a triad: (F-sharp – A – B). It provides a better transition to the next E-major chord. I did not have time to look at the more complex part of the score , but I hope that my ideas make some sense. Alltogether, I must say that you did an admirable job!

Hello Peter, Thanks a lot for your engagement! I am sorry for the delay of my response (too many thing are ongoing for me at the moment). I am glad that you liked the piece. It has been quite a struggle for me to write this piece and I am still not satisfied. I would like to re-write the part which begins at bar 48 and ends at bar 69. There are also some minor “mistakes” in the last part of the piece. But I have to leave it for the moment.. You are of right that there is no real jazz element in the piece. I don´t know why I said this. Perhaps it was just an intention. Right now, I am working full speed on new things, in fact three very different pieces at the same time- I found that this is actually a good method to create a distance between the individual pieces. And great fun, actually. Thanks again Peter for your encouraging words, Best regards Johan

This is a beautiful piece! I particularly like the harmony in bar 13. The B-flat of the violin and the A of the cello creates a wonderful melancholic feeling. However, I think (as other people have noted ) that you should do something about the accented half-notes (f) in bar 16 and 32. I would simply remove them all together. I could even imagine to also remove the pizz. note in bar 8. I am of the opinion that the piece stands well on its own. You might consider expanding the piece with a short intermediate, more joyful part before returning to the initial phrase. This would give an even stronger melancholic/sentimental impact. But this is just my personal idea. The piece is also very good without such an addition.

Hello everybody, Here is the first part of a new piano sonata. The piece is maybe not in accordance with the formal sonata structure, but for the moment, I could not find a better title. In any case, my plan is to write two additional movements. My inspiration for this piece came from a well- known Swedish folk song. I used fragment of this song in the first eight bars, and then, I departed from it. Also, I attempted to use some more modern (a kind of jazz-like) harmony here and there. I am curious to know what you think of this. You will notice a further development of early motifs, for example in bar 125 and 137.. The latter is re-stated in bar 157-164 (including a sort of extra repeat), which serves more or less as an announcement of the approaching end of the piece. It took me a long time before I managed to write the ending. The break-through came when I added bar 169 and 170. A direct transition from bar 168 to 171 is of course also possible, but I think that this would be a bit boring. There is certainly a need for a revision of the score. Particularly regarding the issue of enharmonic spelling (Henry?). I would be very grateful for corrections and/or suggestions

Wonderful piece! I like the variation in structure and the modulations.At the same time, the piece is very cohesive. Congratulations.

Hello Henry and Peter, Thanks a lot for your kind feedback. I am sorry for the delay of my response, which was due to a massive overload of work. I agree that the title could be improved. A scherzo is usually much faster than my piece. Perhaps only “minuet” would be better. I was really glad that the piece was highlighted by Chopin in his composing series on YouTube. I am now working on a longer piece, which will take me a couple of month to finish. Best regards Johan

Very nice piece and very well played! I agree that it can be suitable as a preparatory exercise for the revolutionary etude of Chopin. But your composition stands alone as a wonderful, very coherent piece of music. Congratulations! I would be glad if you could also add the score.

Hello Quinn, Yea, I can imagine that you began to feel that the piece was becoming repetitive. (This is of course often the case in folk music). But then I added a surprise after bar 32, and went more in the direction of classical style music. However, in the end, I came back to the initial motif. Thanks a lot for your response!