adrianallan

I mangaged to get a local choir to perform this piece in their Xmas concert. I recorded it with a pocket digital Yamaha device - so see what you think, if anybody is still interested:

Very hard to make any money out of printed music today - even pennies. The harder the music is (like yours from what I've heard), the less scope there is for profit. The major money spinners today are in instruction books - and they sell much better if a CD is attached too...and also arrangements of pop songs/ vocal scores. However, if you already have a following, then you might sell some copies to your fans. I expect to pay about

I enjoyed this piece. Your tonalities are show an awareness of contemporary styles, such as the minor and major seventh chords that underpin the structure. I am sure that other people will enjoy this music too, and it helps having such an excellent choir to deliver the goods.

I'd like to listen but I can't play m4a files. This may be putting some people off. Why not join soundclick where your song can be streamed so people don't have do download difficult file extensions ?

I liked the first theme very much and the interplay with the instruments. The second theme that comes in at around 2:10, I liked less so, maybe because it just sounded a little too obvious and diatonically major, but that's only one opinion of course. At least I thought there could have been a longer transition to this second theme - but good work overall.

But maybe not musically inspired in itself...is I presume what you are saying. But wouldn't it be fair to say that the most treasured pieces in any instrument's repertoire are those which are both musically inspired and also idiomatic for the chosen instrument. Although Piano is perhaps the most extreme example (so hard to write for a polyphonic instrument without actually playing it), you could never imagine the works of Chopin or Rachmaninov coming from the pen of a non-pianist. But you are right to say that a non-player can occasionally push out the boundaries to good effect. Rodrigo's guitar concerto was considered unplayable by some when first published as for much of the guitar's history, fast arpeggios were considered playable, but fast scales were not. Now it's become a standard work (but still fiendishly difficult).

I think that a few examples here might help to make my point. If you play strings (a little) how much easier is the task of writing in slurs in your orcherstral parts. There is nothing better than trying out bowing to see if a run of notes fits comfortably under the bow. I don't think you can develop a "feel" for owing just by studying scores. And I do believe that a professional score must indicate slurs (but not normally bow direction). Also, would people be confident writing double-stopped parts if not string players, aside from the most basic examples. I tend to see very little double stopped parts (which is of course a useful but occasional technique) on amateur composers. Other stuff too that makes your writing more interesting - like harmonics. Much better to actually know what is possible and be confident in doing so. You don't have to be a player to write well for an instrument, but to write truly idiomatic parts that are comfortable to play and fit under the fingers I think that a few months to a year on each instrument is a really good use of a composer's time. If I had more time (and self discipline) I would do so myself.

The answer to that question may seem obvious, and if it is indeed is, then I merely pose the following question. Would it not be a very valuable use of our time as composers to learn how to play (say to an intermediate standard) as many of the main orchestral instruments as we can ? It may seem like a tall order, but I would guess that a well trained (ie advanced) musician would develop a reasonable ability on any monophonic (not piano or guitar these take way longer) instrument after a year's worth of consistent practicing. Five years, maybe a good grasp of five instruments ? Would that be time well spent, or would I better off just studying scores ?

Although the PDF score did not work properly for me I took a listen and I thoroughly enjoyed what I heard. Good luck in getting it properly performed.

I thought that this was a pretty good piece. Maybe a bit too wordy - too much to take in. What lets it down for me is the limp vocals. They may be in tune, but for this sort of music they need to sound more gravelly and throaty, and this makes for a mismatch between the tune and the vocal performance that gives it a sort of "camp" pantomime quality - not what you intended I'm sure !

Firstly let me say that this is not the popular version of the Spiritual as sung by Paul Robeson and others - I was expecting the melody to go down to an A not a C - as will many other people. But having opted for this version, there are a couple of points worth mentioning. I would have thought that the bass notes of the piano would have more sustain, either by making the first quaver last longer or the use of the pedal. Maybe put some pedalling suggestions in for the piano. Bars 15 and 16 - I wasn' really convinced by the bare 5th in the harmony. You obviously want a sort of cold sound. There are a few other places like that. I shan't mention the obvious stuff like the rolled chord sign running into the notes etc (sorry I have) but for me the biggest question mark about the arrangement is this. If there was over a case to be made for word painting, then this is the song. I think we expect the basses to predominate on the word "deep", but for some reason you have the ladies doing most of the vocal line here... It's a strange inversion of musical logic that I just can't get used to after having grown up this classic bass/ baritone star turn.

I thought this was very good with a very well thought out orchestration and trumpet part. The time signature made for some original rhythms and accompaniments. It is unusual in that it remains in the same sort of tonality throughout (e minor ? even though not given a key signature) and I wondered if this was intentional and for what reason. Also it's obviously a very short movement. For those reasons and more maybe you could provide some "programme notes" on what you set out to achieve and how this movement relates to the other two. Also please tell us what sounds you used - which were good (even though the percussion was barely audible).

Ok, the thing about vocal tenor clef and guitar is some have it and some don't in more recent publications, but it's a minor point in any case. In terms of the first chord, without dropping the A I would say it's a pretty difficult chord and very few classical players have a cutaway. I think that for the sake of one note it's not worth getting people to be a contortionist on the very first chord. I can't think of a chord in VL etude II that is as difficult, even the the single notes go right up past the 12th fret.

Nice mixture of styles. The beginning is pure Beethoven, but then around bar 40 there are some Spanish gestures (whether you arrived at these subconsciously or not) - with the flat 9th over the dominant chord. Those octave doubles in the left hand going down to the very low D - I wonder if these might sound a bit muddy and out of style - but maybe just on my piano. Great touch of humour near the end. the only thing that lets it down a bit is the brooding beginning. It's too similar to Voldemort's theme in Harry Potter - check it out if you don't believe me.

I too questioned the opening chord in bar one. You need a barre on the 12th fret and whilst the other fingers reach over the top of the fingerboard. But it is possible and since it's the first chord in the piece you can take as long as you like to prepare for it. However it would be a lot easier if you just put the A note an octave below - and it would sound more resonant as this is an open bass string. I think you should do this ! Also I should add that modern guitar scores tend to use the vocal tenor clef as it sounds an octave below written notes.