Sans Peur

My dad told me I should push my limits and go further into my creativity. Thusly I have named this piece "no fear". It came to me in a night when I finally decided to let go. Thanks for everything dad, I love you. Merry Christmas.

It's very nice. The changing harmonies compliment the still ones well, and I like the modernist influence.

The moments of smaller texture like at 1:35 are really beautifully constructed.

I feel that the repetition at 1:49 went on a little too long for my taste - the change at 2:02 could have come quicker.

Overall though, great job! A merry Christmas to you!

The flute in the opening is very nice.

It's a pity that the sounds are not the best because the orchestration seems pretty good, but the feeling is that the dynamic forces are limited.

Good job!

7 hours ago, aMusicComposer said:

The moments of smaller texture like at 1:35 are really beautifully constructed.

7 hours ago, Luis Hernández said:

The flute in the opening is very nice.

I also like them a lot. I feel like they are the strongest moments in the music. 

The midi sounds might be blurring my perception of it a bit, but I lack a bit more rhythmic inconsistencies quite a bit. I feel that the way you have it working right now weakens the apparenty very interesting elements in orchestration you have going, as it all becomes one "block" of sound due to not much diferentiation between the parts.

If the parts were more diferentiated you could perhaps reduce the density of the orchestration in some parts, as the ear would have more to cling on to. This would make the music lighter to listen, which is probably a good thing, especially as this is a christmas thing.

1:43 reminds me of Ravel quite a bit, and I don't think there's better compliment than that.

Very good job, I particularly like the harmonies in the beginning, especially when together with the flute part.

Merry christmas to you, I look forward to listening more of your works in the year to come 🙂

5 hours ago, Jean Szulc said:

The midi sounds might be blurring my perception of it a bit, but I lack a bit more rhythmic inconsistencies quite a bit. I feel that the way you have it working right now weakens the apparenty very interesting elements in orchestration you have going, as it all becomes one "block" of sound due to not much diferentiation between the parts.

If the parts were more diferentiated you could perhaps reduce the density of the orchestration in some parts, as the ear would have more to cling on to. This would make the music lighter to listen, which is probably a good thing, especially as this is a christmas thing.

 

interesting perpective, I guess I haven't really put much thought into differentiating different parts to break up the "block" of sound. I'll have to think about that. 

How would one go about learning more about that, just like orchestration books?

5 hours ago, Jean Szulc said:

1:43 reminds me of Ravel quite a bit, and I don't think there's better compliment than that.

Very good job, I particularly like the harmonies in the beginning, especially when together with the flute part.

Merry christmas to you, I look forward to listening more of your works in the year to come 🙂

 

Thank you Jean, have a wonderful christmas and I look forward to hearing more from you too 🙂 

This piece sounds like it could be a film score. It just has that feel to me. It is a pretty piece that you have composed there.

@Left Unexplained

I don’t think orchestration is the problem here (if there’s even a problem in first place), but you should think about the textures you intend for the piece and how to achieve them.

The way it is right now, you don’t seem to have much of a texture (which may be due to the midi sounds, as it would also depend on what you notate for the players and what the conductor asks from them), but you have what I previously called a “block” of sound. In that situation, texture becomes almost irrelevant as the ear will only be able to catch one “piece of information”. If you shake up the arrangement, the ear will perceive many different moving parts that come together into a more lively final-product. Perhaps you could listen to orchestral works by Debussy and Ravel and see what they did there. It will give you a good insight into what can be done.

Also, don’t forget to listen to some 21 century influences, as there are very interesting stuff that can be learnt from those scores.

1 hour ago, Jean Szulc said:

@Left Unexplained

I don’t think orchestration is the problem here (if there’s even a problem in first place), but you should think about the textures you intend for the piece and how to achieve them.

The way it is right now, you don’t seem to have much of a texture (which may be due to the midi sounds, as it would also depend on what you notate for the players and what the conductor asks from them), but you have what I previously called a “block” of sound. In that situation, texture becomes almost irrelevant as the ear will only be able to catch one “piece of information”. If you shake up the arrangement, the ear will perceive many different moving parts that come together into a more lively final-product. Perhaps you could listen to orchestral works by Debussy and Ravel and see what they did there. It will give you a good insight into what can be done.

Also, don’t forget to listen to some 21 century influences, as there are very interesting stuff that can be learnt from those scores.

 

Ok. I could also start reading + analyzing scores, I haven't started doing that yet although I intend to.

The flute line has a nice jazzy feel to it -I wish it would've continued. The following section is a nice change -but I wonder if there is something you can do to change the texture more dramatically? Perhaps instead of held tones, pizzicato strings slowly rising up in arpeggiations of the chord? Until the cymbal crash, then have them tremolo the chord con arco?

That said, this has a very mid-20th century tonal feel to it. I think it's awesome that you're experimenting. Keep up the good work!

1 hour ago, jawoodruff said:

The flute line has a nice jazzy feel to it -I wish it would've continued. The following section is a nice change -but I wonder if there is something you can do to change the texture more dramatically? Perhaps instead of held tones, pizzicato strings slowly rising up in arpeggiations of the chord? Until the cymbal crash, then have them tremolo the chord con arco?

That said, this has a very mid-20th century tonal feel to it. I think it's awesome that you're experimenting. Keep up the good work!

 

thanks for your input. I agree that my arrangements might get a little static, I'll have to put more thought into it.

Is mid 20th century tonal good or bad to you? I could keep going further into the abyss, it seems to be serving me well so far. Thank you for introducing me to greater musical flexibility

57 minutes ago, Left Unexplained said:

thanks for your input. I agree that my arrangements might get a little static, I'll have to put more thought into it.

Is mid 20th century tonal good or bad to you? I could keep going further into the abyss, it seems to be serving me well so far. Thank you for introducing me to greater musical flexibility

 

You're welcome, though not sure how I introduced you to it. I think the mid 20th is a good starting point. With extended harmony, experimentation, traditionalism vs modernism, and even state mandated musical languages... it was an interesting time to be a composer (and the repertoire from that period demonstrates it -as Shostakovich demonstrates). 

Today is a lot more eclectic due to this. I'd argue that what matters today is that your music is coherent and -to use a subjective term- 'works'. Explore to your hearts content and dont hold back your potential.