nigelkeay

This topic reminds me of an article that violist Paul Groh wrote "Elegiac Reaction" where he notes that the viola has become somewhat the mourner-in-chief of musical instruments.... You'll find mention of lots of pieces there around this theme. I know that you are asking for favorites - the Berg Violin Concerto would certainly rank as one of my own.

Typically two years.

Putting a pdf score of your music on a website that you create can certainly be considered a form of self-publishing; you are making it available publicly. Mr Mackey has given good reasons for joining ASCAP/BMI. If your music is played elsewhere in the world royalties are collected by the performing rights organization in the country where it's are played, and if you are a member of ASCAP/BMI the royalties will be passed to them by the other organization, usually 10% is deducted where an international transfer is involved between PR organizations. So if you are putting performable scores on the internet, it's possible that they could be played anywhere in the world and royalties paid, that should eventually end up in your hands as long as you are a member of a performing rights organization. Just because churches are not licensed by ASCAP/BMI in the USA, doesn't necessarily mean that your music being played in a church in another country (eg. France) won't potentially generate royalties, as I already pointed out. On the other side of the coin, there'll be countries where the royalty collection is not as good as USA or France.

Aside from where the royalties go, self-publishing allows the composer to set the price of the performing materials. In France the minimum that anyone can pay as the tarif for performing protected music (live) is about

An interesting topic and blog. Perhaps this is just the way ASCAP works, but why would 50% disappear into the ether if the work is unpublished? I'd have imagined that in this case the composer is considered 100% copyright owner and receives the entire royalty directly, at least this is my understanding of how it works with SACEM in France, where I am. No doubt there are differences from country to country - under SACEM rules the publisher percentage is only 33%, although all of the royalty would go first to the publisher who would then in turn pay the composer.

This is an interesting topic. When my Viola Concerto was rehearsed and performed I came to the conclusion that familiarity with the solo part and the work itself probably affects perceptions of balance between soloist and orchestra, especially when there is a lot going on in the orchestra at the same time the soloist is playing. I think the ear tends to focus on a particular frequency range in the case of complex textures covering widely varied frequencies. I'd be interested to know what others think about this idea. Perhaps I'm suggesting that amplification might be a good idea for new works, until they get familiar, although in reality it's exceptional for a new concerto to receive that many performances and get into the repertoire so that it's widely known. I suppose there's also the historical conditioning from the widely performed concerti and the type of writing they employ, but that would depend on the audience involved of course. Viola is a problematic instrument anyway, I've heard suggestions such as any wind instruments at all in the orchestra will overpower solo viola, not that I really agree with that. There are certainly things the composer can do to help the solo come through, avoid the solo range in the accompaniment etc; but if amplification is used make sure that the sound engineer is well familiar with the sound of the real instrument; I went to an outdoor concert recently of a piano trio that was amplified for a large audience and the engineer clearly was trying to make the left hand of the piano substitute for a bass guitar. But personally I'd still want to hear the original source as the main component of the sound with only subtle reinforcement.

Actually something like this as an instruction doesn't really make too much sense. There are basically two variables in string vibrato, amplitude and speed. So heavy and wide are really defining the same parameter.

I hope your work gets lots of performances when it's finished, but bear in mind that the first few times it's played nobody much will be familiar with the solo line, and that can affect perceptions of balance. This has been my own experience anyway. If the accompaniment is dense then the ear needs to know the pitch range to focus on. In other words keep the instrumentation fairly light. If you are a viola player yourself then perhaps simply write for your own capabilities and learn the solo part in the process of writing - that will give you a good feel for what is needed.

I've written for harp in orchestral situations and have one trio with harp Terrestrial Mirror. I played with a harpist at the time of writing the trio so was able to get her to test out things as the work was in progress. It's definitely vital to imagine what the feet need to do for the pedalling, and know at what speed changes can be made. My writing is naturally fairly chromatic so it took a lot of thought to arrive at a satisfactory part for the instrument; the harpist thought it was difficult for the feet, but it's certainly possible to write chromatic music in spite of the harp being fundamentally diatonic.

It's more usual for the timpani to be separated in terms of barlines from the other percussion, no doubt to separate tuned percussion from untuned.

Qc has covered the string combinations; all could probably be considered "standard" given who's written for them historically except perhaps 3 violins, 1 viola 1 cello. A mixed wind/string combination that I find works well is Prokofiev's (oboe, clarinet, violin, viola and double bass, although this formation has been little picked up by anybody else.

258 is playable exactly as written at tempo of quarter=204 with 2 grace notes sounding together if it's played in second position, in this case it's not at all difficult; the notation is perfectly clear if that's what you want. 264 & 265 are also no problem for the left hand if played in second position, although at a tempo of 204 should be one bow over the 3 notes of the triplet.

It's possible to sound 3 notes simultaneously and sustain all 3 together BUT ONLY if this is at a very loud dynamic; the bow will therefore be, in this case, moving fast at a point more distant from the bridge than usually employed - to compensate for the curvature, in reality to be able to press the middle string down to the plane of the outer strings. Certain chords would work better than others in this case; one where the middle of the 3 strings is stopped therefore lowering the contact point with the bow relative to the other strings. Even if it was possible to use the technique described above, many players on seeing a 3 note chord might still choose to break the stop up in the manner described by jawoodruff.

Last year my daughter wrote her own cadenza for Mozart's K.219 Violin Concerto. She also wrote a lengthy dissertation on the subject, but a main goal was to apply structural principles to produce a stylistically congruous cadenza wihout necessarily being imitative. She did in fact perform the cadenza that she wrote in the context of a full performance of the work. I don't know if she actually tried improvising a cadenza but I would imagine that one would be better placed having done that research and understanding the harmonic principles, in this case Mozart's.

I disagree. The alto clef is the normal clef for viola - the part sits quite happily everywhere in the usual range of that clef for a violist.