mossy84

Y'all are probably kind of tired of these by now, but last Friday in my history and literature of music class, my professor accidentally played the first two bars of a late Medieval motet by Dunstable (which I later found out to be his Quam Pulchra Es). I wrote this piece during the 50 minute lecture, and it turned out surprisingly well. I only had to make significant adjustments to measures 5 and 6 as I was assembling the audio file (these are almost certainly the most complicated in this piece). Anyway, in the style of late Medieval/early Renaissance music, I tried to use much less chromaticism (which turns out to be much easier to do in a major key).

arranged it for choir because i thought it would sound interesting https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hgOJLUVWrGxJwmlK9lqz5SL4dvtyHJMv/view?usp=sharing

I wrote this in class the past two days. As I did this in part to practice audiation and the sound of the piece mostly stayed true to my imagination, I was quite pleased with the result. It's not really a chorale, but I was trying to go for that kind of sound (it would have to be transposed up a minor third to be in the appropriate SATB vocal ranges).

I realized this a bit later, but yeah for organ writing especially in the pedals, I should have probably just specified when to use an extra octave in the registration (probably by writing forte and piano or something like that). My point of using octaves versus a single note was primarily for dynamic control, so if expressive pedals exist, that would almost certainly be a superior alternative. However, for the manuals, due to occasional crossing of voices, I intended for the organist to play octaves (this crossing is most easily observed at measures 11 and 12). This was mostly a software limitation, though I expect that most organists who tried to play it would choose a quieter registration for the majority of the piece. I have an incomplete fugue here (google drive folder), but to be completely honest this piece works just fine by itself, and I have no idea how any successive movements are going to be able to adequately continue what this piece started. It was never really intended to be this long, but just ended up this way in the process of writing it.

I'm most worried about the 1min time limit. I mean, my latest prelude somehow managed to go on for over eight minutes (please go check that out, I spent a ton of time making it), so I'm a bit worried I might get carried away.

It might be a good idea to familiarize yourself with the basics in counterpoint before attempting a fugue. I strongly recommend that you do species counterpoint exercises.

It's been a while since I've posted anything here. Anyway, this is supposed to be a prelude (to an as of yet incomplete fugue), though it likely is significant enough to stand alone, unlike my previous preludes. For those who have listened to my previous works, this piece has considerably more classical/early romantic style harmony (as opposed to strictly baroque). Interestingly, I started this piece as an attempt to demonstrate how to properly use (and most importantly exit) long pedal points in the bass. I encourage everyone to try and find the common pattern between all of the pedal points in this piece.

This is a revised version of an old fugue that I uploaded last June. It did not get much attention back then, so I hope for feedback regarding the relatively strange counterpoint, especially in the last page.

One day a couple of weeks ago, I found this post on /r/composer where some guy (/u/AHG1) wrote a fugue for organ when he was a teenager. Anyway, I thought the subject was interesting, so I decided to do the fugue my own way. The original composer supported my endeavors as well, so I'm happy that he can finally see what I've come up with. This isn't a particularly unique fugue in my opinion, but any and all comments are of course welcome regardless. https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/191AToucbt0E9Py-6MqM0y_22IHwqxq6R

seems to me like that would be schonberg

I just realized that this is an older version. Here's the version I currently use: Anyway, I recently posted a "chorale" in d minor (which I have since renamed to a prelude), which I will repost here since the other one also has a mistake. This one should have a lot more interesting harmonies since it was composed specifically to experiment with them.

I normally try to avoid motions like this, but I felt like exploring the i-VII-iv-i progression a bit more here, which in my mind necessitated somewhat awkward movements in the inner voices with relation to the bass. As you pointed out, the result in this piece is that the tenor and bass form direct octaves; I justified this while writing by having both voices go in contrary motion, though having some sort of awkwardness was largely unavoidable.

I should start calling these preludes. I wrote this earlier today without any sound as a way of testing my ability to write complicated music without hearing it, but I had to make many changes once I actually tried turning it into an mp3 file (obviously).

I wrote this while bored in atonal music theory class, and I intended this chorale to be sung by an actual choir, hence the attention to breath marks not normally necessary for keyboard instruments. I also gave myself freedom to write things unplayable for just two hands (though any organist is welcome to move the bass to the pedals). Funny thing is this piece probably took me longer to assemble into a bearable audio file than it did for me to actually write the notes.

@chopin glad you liked it