prestidigilicious

Pretty much what has been said here. There are a couple of akward spots, but nothing horrifying (besides the poor cellist.) I'd show it to a violinist friend in person.

Just to throw my 2 cents in, as somebody who's both studied an instrument and bel canto (classical) style singing, studying the voice is MUCH harder than people realize or tend to give credit. 1) Bel Canto is supposed to be "natural." You're supposed to naturally manipulate your body so that your resonance flows to the back of a hall projecting your crisp and clear vowel structures. While this sounds fairly easy, teaching this can be a nightmare. If a student is singing poorly, they *think* they're doing something naturally b/c it's probably what they're used to doing and/or hearing on the radio. When a teacher goes to correct/shape a student's voice, they don't have an instrument to grab or body appendages to manipulate (like my viola instructor grabbing my hand as I play). Almost ALL of the work that needs to be done involves hundreds of tiny muscles INSIDE the mouth and throat, on the tongue, surrounding the jaw, balancing the head, and hugging the ribcage. Factor in the notion that everybody's physical bodies, resonaters and vocal chords are different, and the teacher has to resort to using guesswork and highly trained knowledge to figure out how to pass along this student to change something they cannot see or feel. BUT WAIT, it STILL gets more complicated. Everybody knows that puberty brings along changes to the human voice (especially men.) The part people tend to not realize is that the voice truly doesn't "Settle" until the upper-mid twenties to the early thirties. This means that ALL college undergraduates and High School students are training and teaching themselves on voices that will change as they get older. I started off as a baritone and my voice decided to rebound back to tenor. Guess what that means? Relearning the balance of where to put my tongue for vowels at which part of my register. 2) Classicaly trained singers have to study other languages. We have to do more than sound like foreigners though, we have to sound like we're fluent, born speakers of (traditionally) up to four languages. This means that I've had to study French, German, Italian AND proper English diction. While we don't have to be fluent in these languages, we still have to master the sounds of them. Lemme tell you something: every singer has at least one language they have to work their hindquarters off at to sound natural on. For me, it's German. I work and work and work and STILL sound foreign half the time I sing it. Oh, to make it more fun, you have to technically learn singer's diction. This means that if you speak that actual language (like, for me it's french) you have to be able to switch on and off a trigger over how to pronounce things. This is even true in English. "I" becomes "ah-ih" On top of that, while you may not be fluent, you have to understand the nuances to understand what the text is trying to say because.... 3) Singers have to study acting. Even in simple art song/chanson/lieder, if the person just stands up and says a few melodic notes, people stare at you like you've gone crazy. While most instrumentalists get their music, they can get away with a relatively dry and almost disinterested attitude towards their audience (thankfully most don't!) As a singer, that's just simply no. You're supposed to present the illusion that YOU are making the melody up, and there's a reason you're saying it right there on the spot for your special audience. Multiply that tenfold for opera. Just to clarify, if you've ever acted, you can't just say "oh...I'm happy on this part." Nope. Each word has a SPECIFIC meaning and purpose, and good actors/singers understand the nuance of every single one of these words. Each language (and, by extension, songs written in them) have a diifferent pace, ebb, and flow. A good example is the french negation system. In English, "it's I DO NOT like bread." In French, it's "Je N'aime PAS le pain." Notice the different placement of capital words? Guess how that effects the flow of melody and harmony... Also, you have to know which words are throwaways, or the always fun case of people saying something which means something else completely in another language. To go back to my French example, the french don't say: "I am correct." They say "I have reason." SIngers are expected to know or figure out these subtle nuances in each language and act off of them propery.

I have recently discovered the tragically ignored Tailleferre. I found her on complete accident (I was looking for a Milhaud work and found her on a CD of Les Six compositions.) I was wondering if anybody who's heard of her has any thoughts on her. If they haven't...she's definitely worth checking out. I've noticed in her works that I've heard some of the following qualities: 1) She arguably knew how to write for solo stringed instruments the best out of Les Six 2) She's a somewhat gentler version of Milhaud's polytonal playground. 3) She seemed to have mastered "Neo-Baroque" sounds. I think this actually one of her signature sounds. 4) She seems to have a sense of lyricism and melody to rival Poulenc's. The chief difference being Poulenc either went absurdist or folky. She just had the traditional "Parisian" sound in her melodies (I guess an embodiment of what was in vogue when she was young.) 5) While on that note, her sense of phrasing and how to approach a piece suffers the same curse as Poulenc. It can be quirky and odd, but when somebody understands her and decides to share via a recording, WOW! Your socks are blown off. I've included a couple of youtube links I found of some of her works I've particularly enjoyed. Unfortunately, since she's so relatively little known compared to the rest of Les Six (I think the only one more ignored is Durey), it's damn near impossible to FIND a score of hers. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRlX8KCTCOw

The trick is being friendly AND Authoritative. Also, there isn't really a one size fits all type situation. Your singers may be pumped and eager beavers waiting to try something new. Your singers may be made they're having to stay an extra 40 minutes on Wednesday and want to go home to dinner. You definitely, as was pointed out, want to treat them like human beings. Also realize though part of your job is mainting the flow of rehearsal. You shouldn't have to bully them though, just a simple "tenors, can we look at X" should work...should. If you're still nervous, ask your church director or conducting professor for advice.

Right now I've got three works lined up to be performed in April. However, I also had a dry spell last year and only got one work performed. This is in part due to me moving to a new school, getting to know people, spreading my web of influence etc etc. The trick is, at least for me, writing for friends and trying to get performers involved as you're writing. Not only does it make you a better composer via hearing things through the words of the people you try to get to perform your stuff, but your performers are more than likely going to want to perform it if they've helped shape it and have invested something in it other than "I'll play it b/c Presti needs me to." If you look at most famous composers throughout history, they were writing for somebody most of the time rather than just to write out of the blue. This can range from Mozart writing piano works for himself or friends to Poulenc writing chansons for Pierre Bernac out of friendship to Grieg writing songs for he and his wife to perform on tour!

To me, the only way one can truly be "original" is to provide his own voice in his compositions. It is absurd to think that any person who takes any art seriously will put themselves in a box and NEVER grow outside of it. Sure, by society's labels they may not be seen as pioneers, but they themselves have grown and become better artists. If you keep to yourself, you'll find ways YOU can make new music. If these are new techniques, so be it. If it's rediscovering the awesomeness of "Kitsch" music, you'll find new ways to make people tap their toes. As somebody before me stated: it's more the artistic power behind the work that matters.

I really really enjoy this work quite a bit! I like how it develops and expands: no part seems out of place or unnecessary. I definitely agree: it comes across as both a-tonal and quasi-tonal, which is AWESOME in my book. What VST do you use for your Organ?

This flute sonata was written for a flautist and colleague of mine. This work is an experiment of sorts for me: I've been pushing my envelop and playing with rhythmic ideas heavily in this work.I tried to make the first movement very idiomatic for the instrument; the movement captures the flute's strengths and plays with an adaptive piano. A simple exploitation of the 3/4-6/8 relationship is heavily explored, and moving ideas off of the beat to emphasize the high, almost bird like playfulness of the movement.The second, Espagnol (french for Flute Sonata [mp3=prestidigilicious][/mp3]

I love, love LOVE the subject! A "jazzy" fugue is perfect (especially when it's tastefully done!) In addition to the missing dynamics, I couldn't help but noticing there are accents in the recording, but none on the score. Are these intentional? If so, I'd love to see them in to help give the performer an idea. I'd also love to see this done a little bit longer; as of right now, it sounds like a section in something, rather than a movement in something.

I really really like the calming opening of the work. It drew me in immediately! I also like the accent marks occassionaly. I also like your willingness to explore different registers in the piano in the work, though I'd love to see a score :/.