SineQuaNon

Fanfare wasn't written for a competition, the then conductor of the Cincinnati SO invited numerous American composers of the time such as Walter Piston and Morton Gould and of course Copland to write fanfares to begin programs. Obviously Copland's is the only one still in the repertoire. Copland's 3rd was finished in 1946 after approximately two years of work, during which he traveled to Mexico and elsewhere. The dates don't add up, because the Fanfare was written in 1942 and performed in 1943.

This was composed over the span of about three hours, which is half of where the title comes from (in addition to the hasty nature of a good portion of the piece). This was a bit of a stretch for me; the farthest I've gone from functional harmony in a while. BrassQuintet - eSnips, share anything Performed by the Triton Brass Quintet who are basically amazing in every way. BrassQuintet.pdf

Hm, I think this lesson is pretty much concluded, been a pleasure djsell! Enjoy the possibilities. :(

Beethoven, are you even around still?

All correct, now we move right along to the next lesson. First of all I'll explain ledger lines; often the five lines of the staff are not sufficient enough to hold a melodic line. When we go past the last line of the staff on either side, ledger lines act as an 'extension line' for their note alone. To find out what a note on a ledger line (or on ledger lines, as they may extend indefinitely) is we have to count up or down, as pictured. That's all there is to ledger lines. They will help us now, however, as we figure out why these different clefs exist. If you imagine for a second a large piano keyboard, each of these clefs only covers a certain distance and they are named as appropriate (treble- high range, alto- midrange, bass- low range). All of these clefs can be found oriented around the note middle C, which is the centermost (located closest to the center) key on the piano. We should take a second to remember details of the three clefs we've covered; the treble clef can be identified by the spiral around the G, the alto clef can be identified by the lines converging at the central line of the staff, and the bass clef is identified because of the spiral around F. The question is, where do these three notes (F, C, G) lie relative to eachother? The answer is this; alto clef is the easiest because the "C" at the center is actually middle C itself. To find the "G" of the treble-clef sign, we go up to the closest G which is up seven half steps (we worked on half steps at the beginning of this lesson). To find the "F" of the bass-clef sign, we go down to the closest F which is down seven half steps. Even easier than explaining this is seeing it; in the following image, middle C is shown on all three clefs. Notice that it is at the center of alto clef, but one ledger line down from treble clef and one ledger line up from bass clef. When a line is climbing very high or very low in a clef, it is often easier to change clef than to continue adding ledger lines, which can be difficult to read, as illustrated in the following image. The melody is exactly the same in both examples but it is easier to read the high notes in the second one because of the clef change. With very little time to prepare more materials, for practice I recommend using this trainer by a guy named Ricci Adams. In the settings you can choose which clefs to practice on (try all but tenor) as well as dragging the range limits of the clefs around. Five minutes of practice of this a day and you'll be well versed in the notes of these three clefs. If I have time during the next six weeks I'll try and make up lessons on scales and key signatures; if that's not possible, I'll have to resume this lesson on August 11th.

Still though I don't know how anyone could read his handwriting.

Here's another to get your blood boiling. :huh: "Of all the b

"Wagner est

"I have heard ladies and little Wagnerites speak of Strauss's Don Juan with enthusiasm. Others found the thing simply repellent. This is no tone picture, but a confusion of blinding color splashes, a stuttering tonal delirium. That he, as a disciple of the Berlioz-Liszt-Wagner school, has set in motion a huge orchestral apparatus for his tone people, goes without saying... The highest (and heretofore inapplicable in the orchestra) violin notes cut as sharp as glass in our ears; a glockenspiel raises every moment its childish tinkle. We might almost wish that quite a lot more of such tone pictures were composed soon as a non plus ultra of a false unrestrained direction. Then a reaction will not fail to assure a return to a healthy musical music." - Eduard Hanslick (music critic, ally of Brahms) I love these quotes! :D

"Till Eulenspiegel is a noisy, nerve-destroying, heavy piece of work, crude in color, confusing in design, and utterly unlovable." - Boston Gazette "Till Eulenspiegel casts into the deepest shade the wildest efforts of the wildest follower of the modern school. It is a blood-curdling nightmare." - Boston Herald "I am bound to say that dreary though most musical humor is, Strauss's is the dreariest that has ever bored me. I contemptuously dismiss Till Eulenspiegel as a pretentious piece of smart shoddy." - J. F. Runciman, Saturday Review, London "I saw the score of Don Quixote. What a shameless [epithet deleted] this Richard Strauss is!" - Rimsky-Korsakov "Strauss may be characterized in four words: little talent, much impudence. His method is to overwhelm the listener at once. That is why he makes his violins scream, his flutes hiss, his trumpets blare, his cymbals crash. A free for all, everybody for himself, resulting in a terrible cacophony and noise, in which one is lost. So it goes on for about four or five minutes. Then there is a sharp contrast and a lull with something resembling decent music. This music is of the most ordinary sort, but after the preceding it sounds like paradise. But even into these trivial episodes, Strauss constantly throws various wrong notes, perhaps to cover up this triviality. After that the wild cacophony is resume, like a real bedlam. Then there is another lull, and a forced original ending, as flabbergasting at the beginning. This is not music, this is a mockery of music. Yet, Strauss has admirers. How can this be explained? One can understand the desire of some composers to attain fame cheaply with the aid of an insolent, wild, and ludicrous cacophony, but the attitude of the listeners who tolerate it without realizing that they are being mocked at, is incomprehensible. It would be interesting to make this experiment: put blank music sheets before the conductor and the players. Let the musicians play anything they wish and let the conductor conduct anything he wishes, giving cues, and indicating the time, the tempo, and the intensity of sound at random. Perhaps the result would be even more remarkable in its genius than Strauss himself!" - Cesar Cui (those Russians were on a real warpath against Strauss, eh) Modern Opera Hark! from the pit and fearsome sound That makes your blood run cold. Symphony cyclones rush around- And the worst is yet untold. No - they unchain those dogs of war, The wild sarrusophones, A double-bass E-flat to roar Whilst crunching dead men's bones. The muted tuba's dismal groan Uprising from the gloom And answered by the heckelphone, Suggests the crack of doom. Oh, mama! is this the earthquake zone? What ho, there! stand from under! Or is that the tonitruone Just imitating thunder? Nay, fear not, little one, because Of this sublime rough-house; 'Tis modern opera by the laws Of Master Richard Strauss. - New York World

I misspoke, you're absolutely right about the cadenza being at the end of the recapitulation. Really, though, the cadenza can go wherever you see fit or nowhere at all. In the double exposition the soloist doesn't have to repeat exactly what the orchestra did, there can be variation and even new material if you see fit (with the opportunity to have a soloist and accompaniment, a lot of variation in the way of new counter-melodies and effects can be used). As for the orchestral exposition, the best way to look at it is probably as a part-introduction and part-exposition. If it feels too schizophrenic to jump to the dominant and back in time for the solo exposition no one would kill you if it all happened in the tonic. Heck, you could even do the entire orchestral exposition in the dominant and only go to the tonic for the soloist (that'd actually be kinda cool). :o I would say that personally, I'd find a second introduction for the soloist to be a bit redundant but follow your ear and see what works best in the way of details. The concerto form has been messed with so much it's hard to say specifically what one must or mustn't do. In such an event, I maintain, always follow the ear. :happy:

Moving right along let's take a look at our last clef in this lesson, the bass clef. As a violinist/violist you'll never encounter this clef unless you take up the piano or a lower string but this clef and the treble clef are the most common so it's a general advantage to know both (in addition to alto clef as a violist). For bass clef, the lines are G B D F A and the spaces A C E G. Examples of mnemonics for these are "good boys do fine always" (there's something about clefs and good boys) and "all cows eat grass". And without further ado, the exercises! 1. 2.

Concerto form as I mentioned is largely based on sonata form but there are key differences. Exposition: Concerto form begins with a double exposition. First the orchestra plays and introduces the A and B themes, and at the end the soloist comes in and once again we hear A and B. Though the soloist generally carries the themes, that does not exclude the orchestra from accompanying or assisting. Development: The development works largely the same as it might in sonata form, moving rapidly through keys and messing around with previously introduced melodic material. Recapitulation: The recapitulation is not doubled as the exposition and acts as it might in sonata form, with the B theme returning in the tonic. At the end of the recapitulation, the soloist is given a cadenza. Originally these were designed to show off both the soloist's virtuosity and his improvisational talent. Beethoven and many composers thereafter, however, began actually writing down cadenzas (for both their own works and those of previous composers like Mozart) that are most commonly used today. A cadenza typically incorporates the A and B themes into a very dashing, virtuosic impromptu of sorts. What happens in the cadenza, which is unaccompanied, is entirely up to the soloist. At the end, however, the soloist must arrive at the dominant playing a trill on the supertonic (second note of the scale) and make eye contact with the conductor, and then together they resolve into the coda Coda: Codas are practically essential to fully round out a piece in concerto form given that the soloist had just had an entire cadenza to himself. And that's all there is to it, feel free to ask any questions. :D

In some modes, particularly lydian and dorian, it's very easy to borrow chords from the equivalent major/minor scale of the same tonic because the modes are so similar to the scale itself. Since our ear is so familiar with both modulating is a very simple task that can be approached pretty much in the same way as if there were no mode. The interesting thing about dorian is that we have a stronger route to the subtonic via the major IV chord. Slipping into modes isn't a particularly jazzy process and usually doesn't sound like one unless there's a lot of emphasis on jazzy articulation in the melody, or jazzy additions to the harmony, or very jazzy rhythms, or any combination. Modal harmony is fun, but you have to take a moment always to consider the scale and the triads at your disposal and how they're different versus just a normal major or minor scale. If the tonic is clear then often substitutions can be easy, like substituting in a minor iv or major VI chord in dorian. Sometimes the tonic might even sound a bit uncertain, like in phrygian, which would also add a very Spanish tone to a piece (Iberia by Albeniz is a classic example).

Making a PDF is simple, just download CutePDF writer (I'm such a CutePDF writer hoe...).