Luis Hernández

@Colenbacher Hello I understand your question very well. And I also understand that the answers aren't exactly what you're looking for. Although I agree with them as well. I believe that rather than learning harmony from the Romantic period, what matters is learning the compositional techniques that the composers of this period introduced and used (not just in terms of harmony). It’s absolutely true that to understand this, you need to start by knowing what happened in earlier periods, at least from the Baroque through the Style Galant and Classicism. Because many Romantic techniques are reinventions (“recycled”) of all those earlier styles. I don’t think you’ll find specific sections on Romantic harmony in general treatises and books. I’ve had that curiosity, and interest as well. But I studied the Baroque and the Galant period quite extensively, above all. I even started much earlier with the cantus firmus. And that historical and chronological perspective has helped me immensely in understanding even contemporary music. With this, you’ll see that everything is a continuum; even periods that broke quite sharply with what came before (Impressionism, dodecaphonism) are the result of an evolution. So, just as I did with other periods, I sought out the sources myself and compiled a lot of information on this topic on my blog. First, I provided a general overview, which I’ve transcribed here, and then I analyzed techniques such as augmented chords and modulation, secondary subdominants, dominant chains, chromatic thirds, (traditional) linear techniques, irregular resolutions, and so on. Not to mention that Romanticism is a vast genre and that each composer, moreover, has their own peculiarities. Brahms has nothing in common with Chopin. And let’s not even get started on late Romanticism. Some words from my blog: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ROMANTIC PERIOD *New forms: symphonic poem, song cycle, music drama, *Study of the folk-heritage in music and imitation of folk-like melodic simplicity, *Predilection for exotic effects through employment of foreign national coloring or the folkloristic heritage (Chopin, Tchaikovsky, the Russians) [Chopin's more than 50 mazurkas represent one of the earliest examples of overt nationalistic sentiments in music], *Break-up of stylistic unity but more individualism, *Higher interest in melody and color rather than harmony and form, longer melodies *Higher dissonances and a freer employment of them, * More use of dynamics and articulations, * Rubato, *A more innovative treatment of chromatic harmony, *Extensive use of diminished seventh chords, *Modulation to distant tonalities, *Use of relations by thirds, *Greater interest in modal techniques (flat seventh [common to many modes], flat second [Phrygian], augmented fourth [Lydian]), *Assimilation of older elements, especially the revival of polyphony and Baroque forms under the influence of JS Bach [Mendelssohn, Brahms], *Thematicism plays a more important role in a sonata movement than tonality, *Thematic metamorphosis: A programmatic approach to composition often associated thematic material with a character or idea. Changing circumstances or emotional states were represented by the transformation of the thematic material (as in Faust Symphony or Symphony Fantastique), *Cell development technique in nationalist music, (music cell = small and melodioc design that can be isolated) *Use of a cyclic device: Material from one movement recurs in another (a technique related to thematic metamorphosis, idee fixe and leitmotive) (Serenade for Strings by Tchaikovsky; Mendelssohn's Eb string quartet; Beethoven's Symphony No.9), *Manipulation of sonata form, including mosaic and additive structures. More organic treatment of the form, *Postludes in the Lieder (especially by Schumann), *Unity on a large scale: merging of separate movements into a single span (Liszt's Sonata in B minor), larger instrumentations, *Finishing a minor mode piece in major (from darkness to light): Egmont overture, Symphony No.5 & 9 , Piano Sonatas Opp.90 & 111, and the second act of Fidelio by Beethoven; Schumann's Fourth Symphony; Franck's Symphony in D minor; Brahms' s First Symphony. *Intense energy and passion, dramatic opera,

Hello It’s been a long time since then… about 10 years! You see, back then I was in the midst of exploring post-tonal languages. I have to say that to compose with any degree of discernment in any system, you have to study it thoroughly. This was, like many other things from that era, an example of seeing what might come out of these twelve-tone matrices. I say this because many people believe that dodecaphonism and systems of this kind are like ‘formulas’ for making music, and that is not the case at all. Composers of this period expressed, never better said (the Expressionist movement), what they felt and translated it into this music which is by no means created at random. Trying to answer your question... Here I simply tried to follow the rules of Schönberg’s system once it had been developed: that is, all 12 notes must be played before they are played again, so that there is no tonal hierarchy. With that, you can combine the series sequentially, simultaneously, vertically, or in whatever combinations you like. At the time, I chose those combinations in an attempt to make it sound the way it does.

What a wonderful piece. It captures the late Romantic style perfectly. And it’s of a very high standard. Is there a score available?

Here another example with text in Latin.

Hello I have to say that, overall, it sounds very good. Without being a super-expert in orchestration, I think I’d take a closer look at a few things. For example, there are some very large leaps that could be handled differently, such as the bass clarinet and oboes in bars 9–10, or the tuba in bars 107–109. There are other examples too. I’m not familiar with the original version, but perhaps it’s a bit too literal. There are very low registers for some instruments, such as that piccolo arpeggio in bar 87. And with an impossible pppppp dynamic, which is also incongruous: as it ascends, it doesn’t make sense for the volume to decrease.

Yes, I do understand. I think it depends a lot on what your goals are, how you work, and why. For someone who arranges or produces music, who works with a DAW, a ‘wordbuilder’-type concept will be best because the result is surely more realistic (at least for now, given that Cantai has only been on the market for less than a week, according to Dorico). It also allows you to work with lots of different software. But that’s not my role when it comes to music. What I like is writing music and getting it to sound, more or less, acceptable. I do it purely as a hobby; it’s not my profession. And although I’ve used Finale and MuseScore, I’m much more familiar with Dorico. That’s why this integration is brilliant for me.

I don’t know why it’s called ‘Cantai’. But I don’t think it has anything to do with artificial intelligence; rather, it means ‘to sing’ or one of its verb forms in various Latin-based languages. What’s more, it uses recordings of real professional singers (soloists and choirs). I’m familiar with that software you mention. And I used to have it, but depending on what you want to do or what your needs are, it’s better or worse for different people. What I like about Cantai is that you write the notes and the text in the same editing programme (MuseScore, Sibelius, Dorico). And that’s it. It uses expression maps for dynamics and so on. You don’t have to work outside the editing programme (in a DAW, or in XML, etc.). Which is fine, if that’s what you want to do

Hello Have you heard of this virtual instrument called CANTAI? Please note: I have no affiliation with these programmes, even though I use them. https://cantai.app/ It’s a virtual instrument for voices and choirs. It works with MuseScore (which is more advanced), Dorico (the official version was released a couple of days ago) and Sibelius. The novelty is that you write the score, add the parts (soprano, alto, tenor, bass, choir) and write the lyrics... And once everything is set up, the result is that it ‘sings’. I use it with Dorico. It still needs improving, because although it interprets dynamics and accents, and there are many voices available, there will be more. At the moment, in Dorico you can write in English and Latin. But Chinese and Spanish are already available in MuseScore (I think). I’ve written this little sample song to see how it works.

I really enjoyed it. And it reminded me of Ives’s sonatas, although he didn’t improvise. Certainly, given its length and the fact that it’s improvised, it’s phenomenal. It never loses its direction or its appeal.

A beautiful piece that strikes me as being in the neoclassical style. It’s always lovely to see handwritten sheet music. I’m not sure if it’s a live performance or a virtual instrument; these days, anything is possible. The sound is a bit ‘muddled’ for my taste in a style like this.

It sounds fantastic, very cinematic. The backing vocals are a bit odd, but that’s always the case with virtual ones. The score—I imagine it was created in a DAW because it’s a bit… in that style.

Hello This piece is fantastic. It sounds very modern in many ways: dissonances, harmonies, dense textures, etc. But it retains a Baroque spirit. Bravo.

@danishali903 Thank you for your comments; they are very valuable to me. I will certainly take another look at these orchestral versions and keep your comments in mind. However, in general, I believe that during this period—similar to (though distinct from) Impressionism—the conventions of classical or Romantic orchestration do not apply in the same way. Of course, I already suspected that some very fast passages wouldn’t be idiomatic for certain instruments, and that information is very valuable to me. The same goes for playing fast passages in unison on two instruments. However, some doublings that seem unnecessary are there for the sake of color, which, in some cases, departs from classical combinations. This is what we often see in the 20th century. I have a certain fondness for these orchestrations. Because I really like the original piano versions. But they’ve been through a lot. I made them quite a while ago without having a clue what I was doing. Then, when I wanted to revise them, they went through the process of converting to XML, importing into another program... And there are things that need cleaning up. The most important thing is that when I did this, my beginner’s mistakes were very obvious, and I wanted every instrument to be heard in every piece, no matter how brief the passage—hence all the unnecessary doubling and the inconsistencies in dynamics, with too many instruments playing at pianissimo. But I’ve since learned my lesson, and in this very chamber-music-oriented style, you have to be very economical with your sounds. Well, you’ve encouraged me to make a new version taking your comments into account—thank you.

The six short piano pieces date from 1911 and belong to the free atonal period, preceding a more “radical” systematization.

The pieces sound good. The language is simple, which fits the style of music. I prefer the second one as it has a bit of a ballad feel, honestly, I’m getting a little tired of this genre.