Henry Ng Tsz Kiu

My bad! 😁

I actually like the undoubled sound since it reinforces the airy and ethereal mood of the original Faure piece. I think if there’s a bar’s rest it will be better for putting the mutes on. But yeah, using flautando or natural/artificial harmonics can produce that ethereal effect. Will a cornet serve better than trumpet for its more mellow sound? Thx for sharing! Henry

Adler’s book does deal with the orchestration itself in a rather detailed fashion. But again, the main focus should be you listening to many orchestral music with the book beside for your assistance on understanding orchestration. Adler’s book does have a quite big list of music references which I did go through and listening all of them really helps me! Henry

I think counterpoint is essential but it can only be learned only after you have some level of understanding on harmony. Fux’s book is great if you want to learn about counterpoint in Palestrina’s style since Fux aimed at the stile antico counterpoint. I would suggest if you want to learn counterpoint, you should get yourself familiar to the Well Tempered Clavier. And theory books on counterpoint are only supplements to real music for you to understand the beauty of counterpoint in real music, Henry

Hi @interlect ! It does sound like film score when the protagonists are saving ppl from disasters! Henry

I would like to supplement some information too: I think "Harmony and Voice Leading" by Aldwell and Schachter is the standard textbook for understanding tonal harmony. For me Damschroder's series of Thinking in Harmony and Harmony in XX(Composer's name) is a really good practical series. The 3 volume set is William S Newman's series and I had read the series last summer. Rather teaching Sonata form the series is on the historical change in Sonatas in different musical periods so not neccesarily useful for beginners, but it's a really good read if you want to know the history! Adler's book is a must read on orchestration. I read it this year and it helps me so much on orchestral writing! Henry

😱

I always agree with this and think you can never know how to compose unless by composing. To quote Hegel, knowing is always negating since it turns the thing to be known as object, rather than as a subject. However only a subject can compose. A subject is only known by their activity in a continuous sense, so only in the moment you’re composing with inspiration you really “know” how to. I will go further to say music is more than emotional restlessness, it can even be the Spirit’s restlessness express through the composer as the medium to express itself. Henry

Hi @Vasilis Michael my friend! Thx so much for your comprehensive review and appreciation! I feel really happy for it! Yeah I hate doing the same thing all the time so I chip and chop here and there to vary the music. I always think in a chamber music every player is independent and at the same time harmonizing and cooperating with each other (just like a fugue but unlike orchestral music) so I always want every player has a chance to shine themselves and communicating in different ways. Yeah I think it will be boring if I don't do so: I could have changed the melody for variation but since I really love that particularly melody, I can only change the instrumentation and keys and texture for varitation, as well as pushing the music forward. I put coherence and motivic development in the first priority in my music since that makes a piece a meaningful entity rather than seperate parts forcefully glued together to be named as a piece. The harmonic language is determined by the Eb-D-C-B motive itself, as there are lots of modulations via major 3rd which is also the main motive of the whole piece. I want that major motive not only controlling micro but also macro aspect of the whole movement as well. Thx for mentioning Brahms, I only notice recently that the whole Clarinet Qunitet is essentially Brahmsian. Yes, the confuso description is added in this revised version since I find it fit to the music. The dark energy here is released by 1st movement's disappointment and despair and may be you can check it out too if you have time (it's 21 minutes long 😬): When I compose I always think of what I want to express and what the music itself wants to express. To me technicality is always means to the ultimate aim of the music: the unique meaning this piece of music can express. So every piece of music has their own life because they have their own thing to express. Being effective is merely a prerequisite for real expression in arts. I am really happy to have discovered your music and invite you to this forum! I love your music even more since recently I am digging Scarlatti's Sonatas one by one. Thx for your review and activity in this forum! Henry

Haha yeah I can't stop writing until the music finishes itself. The confuso is added in my revision and I find it really fit to the movement! Henry

I actually take the stance of a classical Chinese literary critic book, "The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons" [文心雕龍] that you have to be really familiar with all the techniques and theories that when you write you can forget all of them and use them whenever the music requires. My way of writing is always intuitive but I always study when I'm not writing as to prepare for my intuition during composing. For me it's not appropriate to write for theory; theory serves composition and not the opposite. Theory always comes after works are written, and this holds true for all forms of creation. For me the purpose of music is the same as poems: to express yourself in a unique way, the only difference is that poem uses words and music uses non-verbal sound. I totally agree with you guys, for me there's no intuition or inspiration without already some composing skills in your head. Your knowledge storage determines the quality of your inspiration. I have the same approach with you @Vasilis Michael ! Usually I allow the music guides me to where it want to first, and then after that inspiration spike and I return to my own I start polishing the natural gem with my own polishing skills! Thx for this great topic! Henry

Hi @ferrum.wav ! I just listen to the updated version without scrutinously comparing the score, but I agree the updated version is less boring! The music definitely feels more moving forward and there are more varities in texture. I can tell the quality is improved! Thx for sharing the update! Henry

HI @Kvothe ! It's an interesting topic! To me style follows when you have unique things to express as you can never fake a new style if you don't have unique things to talk about in a unique way. I agree with @Luis Hernández that it's easiest to achieve a personal style by eclecticism, maybe that's my approach towards composing too. There's no one absolutely best style, but only the most suitable style to present your very own thoughts in a most unique way. Henry

Hi @MinGry ! It's interesting for you to end the piece in tonic minor which makes the title "corrupted". I think the voice leading is improved comparing to your first Sonatina no.1, but of course it can be further improved. My favourite movement is the 2nd mov, it really gives some Schubertian singing quality there. Thx for sharing! Henry

Hi @Alex Weidmann ! I listen to both the original and the revised version and I enjoy both versions to be honest. I think for @Luis Hernández 's suggestion is that the whole arppeggiated phrase need not to be played by one instrument alone: for example in 4:20 even if you want the whole phrase played by flute alone, you could have shared the phrase to flute I and flute II players respectively, or in some bars later by divisi Vioin I players which will give the additional benefit of minimizing the volume as well. Thx for sharing this wonderful (again!) arrangement! Henry