Lesson with Marsbars (General Composition, Literature, History)

Hm.

I like what you got, do you have anything planned for the structure? If there is any? What do you want to develop in terms of material? Rhythms? Motives? Dissonance or harmony?

Well, I'd like to develop all of those things. Wrote some more yesterday and came up with a little bassoon ostinato. I was thinking maybe I could develop this part while modulating back to the B -> E harmony while hinting at the beginning motive. Maybe I should just stick with the motive and develop it more and bring in the bassoon part later.

Prepare for a barrage of questions:

A question about pitch ranges: obviously the bassoon is going to stay at the bottom most of the time; what about the oboe and clarinet? Am I free to have them "cross" at any time? or should I swap voices only after a cadence? I also have a part where the upper voices play in unison briefly then break apart - valid?

Let's say we have a "suspended" chord, like a tonic chord with an altered third, and before we resolve the dissonance we move to another harmony like a IV chord or something. Where should that voice move to?

In all the textbooks I've read, a 7th chord usually resolves with the bass moving up a fourth. So what if we decided to go V7 IV or V7 VI, does the earth asplode?

Well, I'd like to develop all of those things. Wrote some more yesterday and came up with a little bassoon ostinato. I was thinking maybe I could develop this part while modulating back to the B -> E harmony while hinting at the beginning motive. Maybe I should just stick with the motive and develop it more and bring in the bassoon part later.

Prepare for a barrage of questions:

A question about pitch ranges: obviously the bassoon is going to stay at the bottom most of the time; what about the oboe and clarinet? Am I free to have them "cross" at any time? or should I swap voices only after a cadence? I also have a part where the upper voices play in unison briefly then break apart - valid?

Let's say we have a "suspended" chord, like a tonic chord with an altered third, and before we resolve the dissonance we move to another harmony like a IV chord or something. Where should that voice move to?

In all the textbooks I've read, a 7th chord usually resolves with the bass moving up a fourth. So what if we decided to go V7 IV or V7 VI, does the earth asplode?

Well! Naturally, we're not working with any specific "style" in mind at least that I can see, so you're free to do whatever you think is cooler. However, I totally would recommend a couple of things to consider regarding your questions:

The ranges for the bassoon are usually hard to describe, since you can also take the Bassoon quite high (Stravinsky's Rite of spring's beginning is played on bassoon.) But you have to know how to approach those notes (prepare them, use step motion, etc. Don't just jump to a high C, for example.)

You can quite literally cross voices with the clarinet and the bassoon for all intents and purposes. It's worth noting though that, again, the ranges if they're too extreme have to be done carefully. As for the Oboe and the Clarinet, it depends what you're doing with the instruments. If you're having a voice serve as accompaniment, crossing voices with it would render that pointless. Though, you can also bypass that with dynamics (the crossing voice is highlighted by a louder dynamic, the accompaniment voices being softer.)

You can also play unisons pretty neatly in the Oboe and the Clarinet, remember that both instruments don't sound alike and that sort of doubling just has a different sort of quality than if you had two of the same instruments do a unison.

Well, with chord sequences and harmony, keep in mind that you can literally grab any note from a chord as the basis or leading note to the next, specially if you're going to modulate and want to work in some chromatics. In terms of resolving a V7 chord, by the norm the 7th always moves to 3rd of the tonic (I), but if you want to spice things up, you can have that as a chromatic to all sorts of things.

Also, you don't NEED to resolve any suspensions, specially not in any traditional way. The 4th suspension goes to 3 and that the 9th to 8 is very text-bookish. Remember also that you're free to do parallel 5ths and 8ths anytime you feel like it. It depends on what kind of effect you want to get. Work with that in mind.

In other words, try to let the harmony choices if using a system be tools, not guidelines.

There's nothing wrong with doing V7 -> VI, or any such variations. It really depends on you wanting that or not. Try stuff out, see how you like it.

As for the form, maybe you can work a little more rhythmic contrasts in there somewhere for a contrast section? Or something like a variation of the beginning. Remember also there's absolutely nothing wrong with using any sort of different composition techniques mid-piece, like 12 tone, clusters, and all these things. It's only a matter of wanting to or not.

One of the things you should be aware of though, is not to bring new things in all the time. A typical error is unconsciously stuffing a piece full of material that gets discarded just as quickly as it shows up. You have so far a lot of stuff with the bits you showed, you can with that write the entire piece if you wanted. Don't think that contrast and such require always bringing new material.

By material I mean motives, rhythmics, harmonies, and so on. If you do introduce something new, try to work with it and don't let it become just a passing afterthought.

But! But but but, by all means, if your intention is otherwise, there's nothing wrong with that either. It must be conscious however, and not because you couldn't otherwise, that's all I'm saying.

I wrote another 12 measures or so, added some slurs, and tweaked a couple of things.

I'm hoping to make this piece at least 4 minutes long; a real mountain to climb at this point. I've been thinking more and more about structure lately. I'm going to try to link back to the beginning motive(in a different key) and see where that takes me. Maybe something like ABABCA form will suit this piece. I also want to move into some more outlandish harmony without losing coherence. I still feel as if I am not "pacing" myself properly as far as stretching the material. Although the "pileup" effect that occurs when introducing new material too quickly is something I'm growing more conscience of. (not to say it can't be used for a certain effect)

Oh, and thank you for clearing up all those questions and everything you're doing so far. Looks like you have your hands full.

woodwind trio.MID

Finale 2008 - [woodwind trio].pdf

woodwind trio.MUS

I wrote another 12 measures or so, added some slurs, and tweaked a couple of things.

I'm hoping to make this piece at least 4 minutes long; a real mountain to climb at this point. I've been thinking more and more about structure lately. I'm going to try to link back to the beginning motive(in a different key) and see where that takes me. Maybe something like ABABCA form will suit this piece. I also want to move into some more outlandish harmony without losing coherence. I still feel as if I am not "pacing" myself properly as far as stretching the material. Although the "pileup" effect that occurs when introducing new material too quickly is something I'm growing more conscience of. (not to say it can't be used for a certain effect)

Oh, and thank you for clearing up all those questions and everything you're doing so far. Looks like you have your hands full.

Well, so far so good, but! If I may, I suggest that you space out your variations a little more. You don't need to run through the entire piece even if you start fast. Though I don't necessarily mean tempo contrasts, note durations and the general rhythm can be variable.

Thing is, what you're doing is spilling all sorts of musical ideas into the score, when you have quite a bunch just with the first 10 measures. Remember the exercises we did with variations?

Another important thing is, don't worry about length now. You're not writing with a specific classical form and it's OK to start with short pieces. The deal is, writing short things is not necessarily easy just because the duration is short. Take for example lieder from Schumann or Schubert, which are generally short. They're very compact and packed full of very complicated harmony and such things, yet very short.

There's a thing about short pieces which you have to consider. It's not that "the goal" is to write something long, but instead the "goal" is to write something that fits what you want to do and the amount of material you invested. You can build an entire symphony out of a 4 note motive, likewise, you can do a 1 minute piece with 800 different motives.

And another thing is that the shorter the duration, the more effective the usage of your material needs to be. You don't have time to develop or linger on repetitions, so everything must be pretty snappy and coherent on the first listen (though this can vary, if your intention is otherwise.)

Now, 4 minutes isn't long exactly, but you need to plan what you do a little more. Generally, a lot of pieces have repetitions, and such other things that add to the length. But they're not without reason.

So, let's go a little over planning.

Since you have your first "theme" there, which I think is pretty nice and catchy, you should probably return to it soon. Changing "key" isn't so important, as it is actually coming back to it. I think more interesting than changing key, is a different harmonization perhaps.

So, you can split the piece into sections where, for example, your main theme shows up. Unless you introduce another one, that is. This works as sort of setting up "check points" along a duration of time. For example, say you have 5 variations of your theme, which you want to go through before the end. You have a measure now as to how to space your piece so that all 5 show up before the end. Plus add in different bridge/contrast sections, and you got something of a plan already.

But that's just one idea, there's no real "right" way to do it, but setting checkpoints for yourself is a good strategy if you have a specific duration in mind you want to shoot for. You also could follow one of the classical simple forms in some way or another, such as ABA form, though loosely. Remember, using material from other periods is fine and dandy, you don't necessarily need to use them just as they were back then either. That's the whole gist of neoromantic/postmodern/etc styles. Just take what you find useful and do what you want with it.

Also, another thing that may help is not writing the piece from "start to finish" literally, but jumping around. Write your ending, write your middle section, jump to whatever you think you have ideas for. It's of course a different approach with its own challenges, but sometimes it's a pretty good method if you're stuck writing "start to finish" but have ideas for what comes after. Also where the checkpoint method is useful since you can coordinate your writing with the checkpoints so you can control the coherent "whole" of the piece even if you're jumping around.

Back to the duration, don't put so much emphasis on how long a piece is. It's good if you have a set duration in mind, but changing your mind isn't illegal. Remember also that many classical forms are sectional, as in you have movements. Though, you may or may not want movements, but it's something to consider. You can maybe do four 1 minute pieces, for example! Doesn't mean they have to be entirely different, but it may help organize your ideas better while keeping your overall "duration" for the entire work within your goal limit.

To what you have, like I said, try to take material from your beginning as basis for variations, etc that come later. You don't HAVE to, but then again your variations can be very contrasting so as to not even seem like variations. It's up to you really. Though, I'm personally inclined to have a piece have a certain sense of "consequence", if you use a specific motive construction at the beginning, you probably should come back to it at some point even if it isn't a direct repetition or right out obvious that you did.

Also, there's the question of having a specific "climax" to the piece, and where to put it. But that's really something you have to define and see for yourself, since it can be an infinity of different things.

So, I hope this helps you organize your ideas better and continue to write it.

I wrote about 30 more measures; curious as to what you think.

I tried returning to the beginning motive but instead got this twisted variation that might turn out to be a climax. From here on I'm going to try to work off of the variation and maybe bring it down dynamically.

Finale 2008 - [woodwind trio].pdf

woodwind trio.MID

woodwind trio.MUS

Well, first off, clean up the score some. You should group up the rests, rather than have all those 8th rests flyin' around for no reason. It's fine if your rhythm is extremely complex that you need to single out the rests otherwise nobody can coordinate, but here it's relatively easy. (I mean like, measure 29, for example.)

Also, remember that dynamics are important. Write them. The bulk of the piece after the beginning is all in mf! It's an important aspect, try to work with it. For example, measure 28-29 make me think of a diminuendo/decrescendo, but since you didn't write anything...

As for what you wrote. Well, be careful using rests, since you can alter the overall flow of the piece considerably if you're using them more than just general pauses. Here you've introduced an entirely different harmonic/rhythmic contrast which I think isn't necessarily bad, but it's a little spaced out.

Consider if maybe you can stick to the idea you present in measure 28-29 until 31 or so. I can see the whole simplification to a single small figure and from that building up, but for the effect to really sink in maybe you can play a little more when the bassoon and clarinet doing the duet.

Another thing is that maybe that super-simplification comes very harsh and sudden in measure 28. If you wanted that, alright. But if not, maybe you want to progressively "take things out" until you're left with that small motive. Or, increase the contrast by complicating the harmony/chromatic to the point where you get dissonance/polyrhythmics and THEN suddenly jump to the simplification. Just as in idea.

What the simplification probably shouldn't sound like is like you forgot to write the rest of the voices. That's why I suggest sticking with the clarinet+bassoon duet a little more and developing it, so that it's clear that the Oboe isn't so much "missing" as it's simply not needed. Dig?

Unless, of course, you intended that specific effect. :>

So, looking good so far. What are you going to do next? It's a pretty big change what you're doing there considering the upbeat-jumpy character of what came before. Remember it's also OK to completely break the jumpy/staccato figures and work a little outside of rhythm with long notes and dissonances. It'd give it an even sharper contrast and a different character altogether (even if you work with the same motives.)

Also remember you can make use of tempo changes, and so on. Accents, too.

And well, my other recommendations are still valid from my previous posts. I'm looking forwards to see what you do with this.

Sorry.. I've been busy as of late. I'll probably get cooking on this piece by next week.

You're right about that over-simplification section - it needs to be revamped as do a few of the other sections. I eventually want to get this thing performed so I've got plenty of cleaning up to do also. I'm going to learn what I have so far on piano and hopefully I can get a firmer grip on the writing that way. We'll see.

s'coo'. Thanks for telling me.

I wrote another contrasting section that moves away from the jumpiness/playful character. I'm not sure if it's possible to play due to the long notes. All instruments are playing continuously for 20 measures or so - is this a problem?

I'm still not sure what to do about that sudden transitioning point but now I'm leaning towards leaving it as is. If I'm going to change anything it would be to develop the clarinet/bassoon duet a bit more as well as the beginning motive.

About rests: should I try to condense rests into dotted where possible?

Finale 2008 - [woodwind trio].pdf

woodwind trio.MUS

woodwind trio.MID

I'm in the middle of a lot of stuff, so give me a couple of days and I'll write my opinions as always in more detail.

Concerning your "play for a long time" for winds, you can sometimes count on people doing circular breathing, but that's not always the best way to do it. If the passage is relatively slow notes, like whole notes and such, you can pull off circular breathing a lot easier. But a good wind player can really do it at all times almost. It shouldn't be a problem. Plus, just write whatever you want and then we can worry about the actual technical problems since those only really merit a couple of tiny detail alterations. Don't write your piece thinking it's playable or not, write it like you want it and then worry about the technical details.

The reason to do it like this is that once you're finished writing what you want you at least know how it "should" be, and you can make technical changes with an orientation on how it should be and strike a balance between playable and what you originally wanted. If the case it's too hard or complicated. If it's all playable (in this case it seems all pretty playable to me) then no problem.

Anyways, there's some other stuff I want to say but right now I'm short on time so it'll have to be later, sorry.

K.

So, right off the bat, I'd suggest making a rall on measure 53 or so. Try it out see if you like it. I think it'd be more.. hm.. "smooth" with the change that comes after. Plus, you haven't used tempo changes so here would be a good place to do it.

On measure 34-35 in the oboe, you should PROBABLY specify dynamic, since you haven't since before and I don't think you want the exact same character for that motive/voice in that area. Plus, perhaps you can add accents and/or staccatos to the bassoon and clarinet to make the contrast/pulse more evident and contrasting.

As for the new section at the end with the long notes and unison, and stuff, you should probably take a couple of the motives from the first part or some rhythms to sort of make the connection that you're not just "writing a new piece" each time you write a new section, and that the entire thing can be heard as a "whole" rather than disjointed sections.

The passage from 63 till 71 seems a little too long with the same idea. Specially the harmony and rhythm seem very downplayed considering all that you did just before getting there. I'd recommend you rethink this section and see if you can bridge what comes at 72 with what comes before this passage in a different way.

Something you should know too, sometimes it's better to write ties rather than dotted notes if you have other voices doing different things, specially in measure 5 for example in the oboe. The F is easier to read if it's tied (quarter + 8th.) It doesn't matter so much when everyone's playing the same rhythm (like measure 12, etc.)

As for your rests, just respect the 4/4 traditional rule if you want. Only group rests if they're in 1 and 2, or 3 and 4 beats respectively. There's no real rule, so long as your actual notes are written properly.

I don't understand why you're connecting stems over rests in some parts, like measures 23-24-25. So, if you can clear that up, that'd be great.

Well that's all I can think of right now, keep writing!

Hey man.. Can I call you Chris?

I'm not going to complete this project because I pretty much lost interest in it. This doesn't have anything to do with YOU or how you teach or anything like that. Believe me, you helped me out more than you can imagine. I know you're busy with a bunch of different things and I don't want my indecisiveness or lack of interest to hinder or trouble you. I recently went through a bad (religious, spiritual) experience and things got "shook up" a little and wound up deleting all of the music on my hard-drive and almost everything I ever composed. I realized this project has pretty much been pushed completely to the brink of oblivion and I'm not in the right state of mind to return to it. It's not that I don't like the piece, I think it has its moments, but right now I can't force myself to work on it nor would I ever want to do such a thing.

Now I'd just like to thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for what you've so carefully taught me. It's not often people extend themselves as you did without money being involved; especially over the internet. Many things went down in this thread, things were taught, music was made, composers were discussed. The most important thing you did was break me free from my musical shackles . I was afraid to set pencil to paper or create a note in finale before this thread. Now I feel I have more control over my own creative output and thoughts.

Thanks

edit:For the record. That "bad" spiritual experience was just the conviction of the Holy Spirit. I wrote the above around 2 days after Jesus Christ saved me. SCC, if you ever read this, I hope you can look in my thread in the Serious Discussions forum or the Bible and read how you can also get saved.

-Joseph

I understand, and certainly it's no bother to me at all. We can stop working on the piece if you like and maybe talk about other things, remember that I'm here to help you as a composer/musician/so on, which includes stuff like this.

I'm open to anything you'd like to talk about/work on/anything, so if I can be of any help, please do say so. I hope things get better for you, though I didn't understand exactly what happened it's none of my business if you don't want to tell me.

On the other hand if you're sure you want to just end the whole thing and move on, I can cancel the pairing and that's that. We can also just leave it on hold until everything settles down on your side maybe, so it's your pick. Think about it, no rush.