MattGSX

Bruckner and Franck, as well, liked to really stray from and obscure tonal relationships. Chausson, as well, played with a lot of "wandering harmonies" that were fairly fantastic (the double quartet for violin and piano accompanied by string quartet comes to mind). There's nothing wrong with limiting authentic cadences to the start and end of a piece.

1. Take time to learn how to read music (at least one clef). I go to a state school in what Nico has insultingly referred to as a "thrown-together composition program" (I study privately with our theory teacher/electronic music director [ASCAP/BMI/SCI awards recipient] and our artist in residence [ASCAP/BMI/SCI awards recipient]), and the entrance audition for the music dept (regardless of major/vs minor or content area) included music reading and basic theory. You have to learn it. Most guitar majors come in reading very little music, but they can still read it. I know the test for most people coming in to check for note reading was to write out "Mary Had a Little Lamb" and have the student identify the melody without playing/singing it. 2. I facepalm every time I see the phrase "I just write what sounds good". I'm sorry, but unless you have a very well-developed internal sense of pitch and harmony, it's probably not going to sound good. In your case (Your case being the OP) if you consciously can say that you write modally and that you write outside of your implied harmonies, you probably know enough theory to get by. Again, for the average "state school" audition, this will mean writing out a scale, writing a key signature, etc. 3. I don't know how it is for conservatories or the top-rated state schools, but most universities that I've checked out (including the one I attend) didn't start the actual comp track until you've gone through AT LEAST your first year in theory (2 semesters), and in some cases, 4 semesters. 4. Worry about getting into a school's music department first. Learn to read music, learn your scales (for guitar), work on your fingering technique, and learn/memorize a repertoire piece or two. It's easier to get into school than it sounds, and if you can get in as a BA or BFA student, it will be easier to get into a comp program. Again, this doesn't apply if you plan on going to a specialized music academy, but since you don't read music, I'm guessing this isn't the case.

Your teacher said "what" can be that way? I presented you a ton of different thoughts and comments, and your answer leaves more questions than answers. Also, if you only want positive comments or fawning, (as can be surmised from your ignoring my constructive criticism), I'm not sure you've found the right community. In fact, I gave you several very specific suggestions, all of which were ignored.

I'm not fond of the opening. I feel like the percussion, for the most part, is over-scoring for the relatively small instrumentation. The timpani and cymbals will end up drowning out your guitar with the big timpani rolls and cymbal crashes. The second half, though, with the polyrhythmic figures, was much more to my liking. I'd greatly like to see a score of this to be able to give specific thoughts and suggestions. I imported your midi into Finale, and it's implying 4/4 with a metronome marking of 120. Please tell me you're kidding. Looking at the score, there seem to be many instances of direct copy-pasting of phrases with a changed note or two. If you're going to repeat phrases, use different instruments, different ranges, different modalities, etc, etc to keep things fresh. The 5/8 section I especially liked. I feel like the whole piece could comfortably shift from 5 to 6 fluidly, getting rid of some of the fluff.

Ron, I'm not sure if the MP3 worked for you. If that link doesn't work for anyone, let me know, because I'm going to be hosting all of my stuff there from now on. After some deliberation, I've decided to take the cello-bass tutti figure at the end and use pizzicato for the bass to give an added texture. It sounds much more transparent that way. I'm debating some different options with mutes and other color options, like using senza vibrato in the opening.

/me admits that I am foolish and forgot that Finale comes with an electronic help manual, so it doesn't matter where the paper one is. Thank you for the help.

I don't have my manual. Otherwise, I'd happily consult it.

Sorry if this was already posted - I couldn't find it. Does anyone know how to beam across staves for a piano in Finale?

Not a problem, as long as bandwidth doesn't get too out of control. I currently have the MP3 posted here. It's in the "Composition" subfolder. All the other stuff is pretty much pure garbage.

Wow - if I only have notation errors going on, then I must finally be doing something right. Thanks to both of you for looking at this. Flint - for the obscured beats, are you referring to measures like 21-22 and 22-23 where there ARE no downbeats? Michel - You have no idea how much your praise means. After finishing my last big piece, I really had no inclination to write this, and it was an undertaking that put a lot of pressure on myself and my systems of writing. Rhythmically, I feel like it's still "weak", but at the same time, I want this to be crisp, precise, and not confusing/frustrating to performers. Bass/Cello at the end - I want to hear it with a live orchestra before making the final call, but I think you're right. I was considering giving the bass the pizzicato eighth note figure carried by the violins throughout the first theme group. We'll see how Monday goes. I printed out a copy of the score to get a better feel for how it works out, and I noticed (and I'm surprised that neither of you caught) that I have a few "out of place" expression marks, like senza sordinos for an un-muted violin 2 and other little things like that.

Orchestration: String orchestra (minimum 4/4/2/2/1, maximum ?) Harmonic Language: Varies. There are sections with very clear and traditional tonal centers (most notably the end of the exposition), with other areas of less clear tonal focus (though I hope it's still apparent). I tried to use modified chords to imply harmonies, as well as pan-diatonic pitch organization. Intended Level: College orchestra +. I don't push the extremes of the instruments, but there are several passages with multiple (fluid) string crossings, false harmonics, and a good deal of importance placed on the second violins. This may get a premiere in the fall, and I have a reading session next week, so if you have any suggestions, PLEASE share them. I find it hard to talk about my own music without feeling pompous, so I'm not including too many details. However, I wanted this to be a fairly accessible piece, using non-traditional harmonies and other tools in a traditional way. The whole piece is in a modified sonata form, with the exposition and recap inverted (the primary theme does not appear unaltered until the first transitional statement, the second theme functions as the coda). Down the road, I may want to use this as the inner movement to a larger scale work, but we'll see. PDF, Finale 09, and midi attached. Thanks in advance! PS: The fact that the piece "is" dissonant but doesn't sound so is partly intended. I tried to use extended harmonies, pedals, and other effects to create a very lush sound that also falls outside the boundaries of traditional harmony. Gonzales - Nocturne.mus Finale 2009 - [Gonzales - Nocturne.pdf Nocturne.mid

A few thoughts, organized as I encounter them. 1. Opening; I really don't feel like your opening (the first 40 measures or so) is especially effective with the length you've used. I feel like this could be much shorter, with a fermata only at the end of mm 4 - the other ones just don't fit the character so well. Also, I'd consider using the 3-measure arpeggiated figure as something other than a static chord. It may work well to use a I-I6-V figure, or something similar, with the minor section being a i-ii6-V, or whatever. 2. Sequencing - I'm not bugged by your sequencing; this is a cornerstone of baroque writing. I would, however, switch between tonal sequences and exact (or perfect or literal or whatever term you use) sequences, and use sequence with alterations here and there to give a stronger sense of motivic development. 3. Instrument range-usage - Your double bass goes below playable range. Unless writing FOR an ensemble with a 5-string, this isn't advisable, especially since that kind of goes against the whole "period writing" thing. Also, I don't feel like you use your solo instruments effectively in your opening section. All of the "I'm just embellishing a chord for a few measures" figures would work equally well as ritornellos. Also, if writing a contrabass part that simply doubles the cello, combine it onto one staff, especially with the font size used. You also haven't written in a single bowing-tonguing, etc, etc marker. Are you telling me you want the strings to take every note on a new bow and have the winds tongue EVERY note? A recorder will typically use a soft tongue on every note, but this is not practical for oboe (and impractical for the modern flute). Your articulation is inconsistent, which doesn't fit the period you're writing for. It may be more effective to use bowing indications and tonguing/phrasing indicators, which will give the effect you're looking for AND be much easier to read/interpret. 4. Score cleanliness - When copy-pasting, please delete the tempo indicator to make it less obvious that you're copy-pasting. Please fill in each measure with the correct number of rests, and make your rest usage uniform (IE; if the cello gets a dotted quarter, so does the bass, etc, etc). Also, your primary motive would be better notated as eighth quarter-tie-quarter eighth rest. The way you've written it obscures the meter. As already mentioned, ALL instruments get fermatas, dynamics, etc, etc. On the topic of dynamics - it gets really boring when your only switches are from loud to louder. Use the full range of your dynamic spectrum. If you want to be "period accurate" then just use pianos and fortes, with MAYBE a FF to signify a climactic moment (but I wouldn't use more than one or two).

Most of the arrangers I know work directly for a publishing company, with their assistants working as interns to the publishing company (at least, this is the case for school music). I'd really consider applying to publishing companies offering your services as a copyist/arranger. I don't know how jazz/pop goes, or how independent arrangers work, so I can't offer advice in that area.

I agree, and i think the technique fits the piece well. I don't, however, feel like you should have only a single measure of it.

This is a very nice piece, and I'm glad to see you using the viola in this way. I have a few comments on the first movement, and I'll probably come back and do the others; mm 6-7 - I like the way you revoiced your chord to avoid a harmonic syncopation - that having been said, I don't feel like there's enough going on between the end of your first tutti and the entrance of the solo viola. Maybe using a 4-3 suspension in the viola, carrying the Bb over from measure 5 and resolving it on beat 3 of measure 6 would help. Re-voicing your chord in mm 5 to allow a 9-8 over a 4-3 may not be a bad idea, either. In fact, I'd use more suspensions in general. mm 19 - how do you want your violist to bow the triple stops? An upbow and downbow triple stop sound completely different, so unless you want to leave that up to the performer, I would notate the bowing there (just using a double down or down-up would work). Actually, whenever this occurs, you may want to include bowings to indicate if you want the up or down bow stop (as I said, they sound completely different) You have several instances where you set up a pattern for the soloist and then abandon it without taking time to develop it. This occurs first (that I noticed) in mm 19 (with the triple stops), then in 24, and then in mm 55. The one in 55 was especially frustrating, as the bow technique you're asking for is 1) not a Baroque bow technique 2) Not usually used for a viola and 3) sure to draw attention. Instead of using a key signature change, common practice within a piece (in this period you're writing in) would be to write out the accidentals unless modulating to a foreign key for a very extended period of time. Since this is a standard modulation, I'd really just stick to the F-Major key sig. More people will be thrown off by the key change than the accidentals.