Piece for Cello & Piano

''Gefunden'' for Violoncello & Piano is inspired by Kurtágs chamber music next to the poem ''Gefunden'' by Goethe.

I am very curious what you think of the music and the notation.
Since this year I have been experimenting with different ways of notating and giving freedom to musicians so that the musicians are in a way also composing the music.
Unfortunately, but obviously, the playback does not interpret the music the way I want it to be interpreted, but the audio gives an idea.
I hope to record it in the coming months in a church.

Best regards,

Maarten Bauer

Interesting concept. 
Couple notes about the cello writing: No need to put the sounding note above an artificial harmonic. If it was a natural harmonic, it'd be a good idea, but there's only so much you can do with a false one. Low artificial harmonics are not easy, and will not come out in the slightly stifled timbre I think you're after. Most of the time it'll just be wrong.
The piece is good in concept, I'll just mention I'm not a huge fan of these constant pauses. In the opening and ending, they make sense kinda, since it's kind of like a chorale feeling, but in the middle (especially when it gets faster), I think you miss a bit of the opportunity to ramp up the drama. I imagine all of those huge contrasts being juxtaposed one after the other nonstop, ending in the fortissimo right before the Lento, in stark contrast to the outer sections. 

38 minutes ago, Monarcheon said:

Interesting concept. 
Couple notes about the cello writing: No need to put the sounding note above an artificial harmonic. If it was a natural harmonic, it'd be a good idea, but there's only so much you can do with a false one. Low artificial harmonics are not easy, and will not come out in the slightly stifled timbre I think you're after. Most of the time it'll just be wrong.
The piece is good in concept, I'll just mention I'm not a huge fan of these constant pauses. In the opening and ending, they make sense kinda, since it's kind of like a chorale feeling, but in the middle (especially when it gets faster), I think you miss a bit of the opportunity to ramp up the drama. I imagine all of those huge contrasts being juxtaposed one after the other nonstop, ending in the fortissimo right before the Lento, in stark contrast to the outer sections. 

 

Thanks for your thoughts! 

I put the resulting note in the artificial harmonics to make sure they hit the right note, but you think that it is obvious enough with the two bottom notes? 

About the breaks, in the outer sections they are the way I want them, but I left the pauses now like this in the middle, because I want to look how it turns out in practice. I must say though that I also found the breaks in that section quite disturbing... Certainly not done with that. 

On 8/4/2019 at 4:04 PM, Maarten Bauer said:

I put the resulting note in the artificial harmonics to make sure they hit the right note, but you think that it is obvious enough with the two bottom notes? 

Any halfway decent cellist will know what the two notes mean. Source: I'm a cellist and I suck.

Very nice work.

I was taught in contemporary composition that not using time signature is good for a solo instrument. When there are two persons playing it can be a problem (not to say in an ensemble or orchestra). Unless you deliberately want an "indeterminate" piece where the players are more or less free to read (which is not the case, I think), it's better to use time signature. Perhaps in the first slow part they could manage it, but in the presto part it would be a problem.

(I wrote a piece for three clarinets not using time signature, and my teacher sent it back to me because the players couldn't make it sound good. A lesson I learnt forever). Perhaps your opinion is different...

20 minutes ago, Luis Hernández said:

Very nice work.

I was taught in contemporary composition that not using time signature is good for a solo instrument. When there are two persons playing it can be a problem (not to say in an ensemble or orchestra). Unless you deliberately want an "indeterminate" piece where the players are more or less free to read (which is not the case, I think), it's better to use time signature. Perhaps in the first slow part they could manage it, but in the presto part it would be a problem.

(I wrote a piece for three clarinets not using time signature, and my teacher sent it back to me because the players couldn't make it sound good. A lesson I learnt forever). Perhaps your opinion is different...

 

Thank you for the thoughts! 

I really want the piece to be free: the final result is in the hands of the performers. I know that it is very hard tp get it in synch, but I do not want to have it in synch.

I know the performers really well, so we will be experimenting with it! 

13 minutes ago, Maarten Bauer said:

Thank you for the thoughts! 

I really want the piece to be free: the final result is in the hands of the performers. I know that it is very hard tp get it in synch, but I do not want to have it in synch.

I know the performers really well, so we will be experimenting with it! 

 

Then it's OK. The software version makes it too "perfect".

Do you know about "proportional notation"? It's another solution.