Luis Hernández

Hello I've recently decided to take orchestration seriously. Just as I did with counterpoint back in the day... Yes, although I study on my own, I have always been self-taught, at some point you need guidance from an expert. So I am taking a course in orchestration. It is really for a very small group (only four people), which means the feedback is very powerful, as each person's work is reviewed in depth. I've learned a lot about the classical style (paradigm: Mozart). Why and for what purpose each thing is used. And here I share my version (reviewed by my teacher) of the orchestration of the first movement of Mozart's Piano Sonata No. 5. Now I'm working on Mendelssohn.

Hello This aria could very well be in a Baroque opera. It's a shame that the sounds are so strange. It sounds like it's from the 90s with the new age style, when they did covers of classics. It sounds like electronic music.

A beautiful piece with particularly harmonious interest. It needs to be completed with dynamics and accents. With that, the fact that the accompaniment pattern does not vary would not be such a problem, as it is a little monotonous as it stands.

Another very effective example of contemporary techniques. This mixture and intersection of modes reminds me of Bartók. The truth is that many people think that anything goes in these styles. You take two scales/modes at random and start writing things. That's not the case at all. It's mentally difficult (unless you have a lot of experience as a musician and composer) to imagine how two different modes can clash/converge simultaneously... And then you have to write with great care and attention. Chapter 2 of this book is very dense! Thank you for your exercises, which are making me reread all that material.

A very enjoyable piece. Leaving aside some noise and clicking issues in the audio, I think it lacks something to bring it closer to the style, and that is dynamics. Although classicism (and Mozart, of course) did not make extensive use of gradual dynamic contrasts (but rather more powerful ones such as piano and forte), there are none here either. More than that, it is the accents, sforzandos, etc., which were very common in this period, that make it sound like it.

A beautiful piece. I think the subject matter is very original and distinctive. That really helps with the recognition of the entries. The parallel descending movements are very beautiful, with those appoggiaturas, etc., as in bars 19 onwards and later with the reinforcement of the bass. I think it loses none of the essence of counterpoint, but it has many touches that make it sound modern, such as the profusion of articulations. Best regards.

Sounds good. The 13th bar is strange, but I see you've made a correction. I think there's some pretty good imitative treatment, characteristic of the Inventions. So many colours confuse me a bit. I suppose they highlight imitations or motifs, but as I'm colour blind, I can't tell. Best regards.

Nice text.

That sounds great. I love this series you're doing on Persichetti's proposals. Organised, it would be a fantastic resource for anyone studying the book.

Fantastic, even better because it doesn't sound strange at all. And the bass is very powerful.

Hello I have some questions about this exercise. I already mentioned that this book by Persichetti is like a “bible” to me. I also do the exercises he suggests. In this case (I have the Spanish version, but I think it's well translated), I think it says that the added notes are on the cello and double bass (in octaves). Strange, isn't it? I've only analysed the first few bars, but I think your added notes are more in the upper registers, is that right? Regardless of all that... it doesn't matter. The piece is very beautiful. It sounds emotional and intimate, and everything fits together very well. Perhaps it's a very heterophonic style (I mean, with little counterpoint), which I don't think is bad. It reminds me a little of some of Mahler's work. Very good work.

Fantastic. You took the exercise to the extreme without compromise. Everything is vertical structures. But the sound is very consistent throughout and captures the interest. By the way, that book by Persichetti is wonderful.

It's good to see how others organise themselves. The idea of working on the sketch in three staves or more, depending on the volume, is great. Perhaps in a future project I will try to do the sketch for solo piano, as the intention is not so much to imagine orchestral colours as to establish the structure, parts, climax, harmony and rhythm.

Context: composition of an orchestral work or, at least, a chamber piece. Do you first use a sketch for solo piano? What advantages would this have? With the whole range of software and virtual instruments available, the temptation (and reality) of composing directly for the orchestra is very strong. As an amateur composer who makes music purely for intellectual pleasure and for the senses, and also because I am partly self-taught and partly formally trained, I confess that the small pieces I have written have been without a piano sketch. By piano sketch, I do not mean, in this case, a reduction for piano that is idiomatic for the instrument, even virtuosic. I mean a sketch that captures the basics: structure, harmony, melody, rhythms, accents. I consider my training in classical and modern harmony to be very good. In counterpoint, quite good. But lately I have become interested in orchestration and, in turn, trying to structure a work of a certain length (without going overboard for the moment). And in this sense, I think that the piano sketch can be very useful and not a waste of time. In relation to this, I am also doing the opposite: orchestrating fragments or small pieces for solo piano. What do you think?

Thank you for organizing this event. It has been wonderful to listen to such a variety of proposals.