Planets Suite Progress Thread

[caters]

I'm about halfway through the Mercury movement now. I have been given some good and detailed feedback from other people, but I figured more opinions can't hurt. I haven't gotten any feedback saying that the way my rhythms are notated is wrong since several months back. I guess they understand that I have hemiolas in there and have notated in a way that emphasizes those hemiolas instead of trying to stick faithfully to standard 6/8 notation. I have 11 bars left before my proposed placement of the 4 flats key signature. I used a sequential thirds pattern in the forte section because I liked the relative switch I was using and I have gotten to the F minor that then leads into Ab major. I'm breaking the sequence at the F minor. Haven't quite decided what to use to lead into the Ab major, although a Cm -> Db -> Eb progression is an intriguing possibility.

Here's some of the feedback I have gotten:

Quote

A few things I've noticed with your score is that a lot of the winds don't have slurs with the 16th's and seems extremely tricky and not enough space for the players to breathe. I'm not sure if you're focused just on the actually laying out the foundation of the score first and then worrying about playing techniques later, but I would highly recommend adding proper slurs for the winds to notify the players of when they should breathe.

I kind of expected this feedback though, it's instrinsic to my composition style to go notes first, then slurs. So I will add in the slurs later.

Quote

Another small detail in the score is that the timpani's/percussion should be above the piano in the layout and if you ever add harps, the harps go below the piano.

I knew about the harp below the piano thing, but I did not know about the timpani being above the piano, I've seen it both ways.

Quote

In my opinion, I think you should add glockenspiel, harps, and piccolos. I think with these added instruments, they can add a very glassy and quite swift mood. Again this is my opinion, but I think it can give more of a feeling towards the mood that you're giving with this planet and it will give some contrasting ideas within the piece.

I honestly did consider possibly adding glockenspiel to the orchestra of Mercury back in November when I started composing the suite and planning the movements out, but then, the whole thing with the glockenspiel playing a glisteningly icy melody in Saturn made me think:

Quote

I probably shouldn't introduce the glockenspiel this early. If I did, would I include it in Earth? Mars? Jupiter? By then, it's not very special anymore that it's playing the melody, it's expected and it means less contrast between Saturn and the other movements. And isn't more contrast better in a suite not bound to a specific key such as this one? I think so and so does Holst, the main inspiration for the suite.

Harp, eh, it just feels too warm in quality to me for Mercury. Earth though might include it and therefore Mars might include it as well, as I do plan on referencing bits of material from Earth in Mars. Piccolo? If I'm going for Mercury having one of the smallest orchestras, why include any woodwind auxiliaries in the Mercury movement? Jupiter will definitely have piccolo. Venus, possibly, as it would add to that "hellscape feel" I would be wanting to get across in Venus, but Mercury? I don't think so, I don't think it's wise, as it could easily overpower everything. In Jupiter, there is less of that risk because the orchestra is massive. Think difference between Classical era orchestra and modern orchestra and you basically have the orchestrational difference between Mercury and Jupiter. And yes, I'm aware that the piccolo was used in the Classical era, but it wasn't common in use until after Beethoven's Fifth Symphony was premiered.

Anyway, here is what I have so far of the Mercury movement and something that I noticed after improvising for the B section, the icy section of Mercury. While improvising for that section of Mercury, I noticed the melodic material representing the icy rings of Saturn showing up in the bass. I was wondering if I should keep this foreshadowing of Saturn in the B section of Mercury and have the woodwinds and piano play an embellished melody over it to make it less noticeable(I mean, the pizzicato already makes it less noticeable, and is a difference between the A and B sections, the strings are all arco in the A section, but the B section I plan to have a lot more pizzicato, but an embellished melody being played over it would hide it to the ear even more). I will make further posts in this thread as I progress in the suite. If this would be better suited in Orchestra and Large Ensemble, by all means, move it there. I just thought this would be a good place for it as none of the movements are complete yet.

MP3

Play / pause

0:00

0:00

volume

> next

menu

Planets Suite - Mercury

Mercury vs Saturn

> next

PDF

• Planets Suite - Mercury
• Mercury vs Saturn

[kwokon987]

Hey, I was going to give my 2 cents, but I after reading your post I feel like I'm missing out on a lot of context? 

• Is this supposed to be set in classical era?
• Does this have anything to do with Holsts' Planets?

 

[caters]

On 4/15/2021 at 9:45 AM, kwokon987 said:

Is this supposed to be set in classical era?

No, in fact I'm trying to get a more modern sound in the harmonies while still not having it be too dissonant as the most dissonant movement comes after it. When the Bass Clarinet and English Horn along with other instruments come in in later movements, it will be more obvious that I'm working with a modern orchestra rather than a classical orchestra.

On 4/15/2021 at 9:45 AM, kwokon987 said:

Does this have anything to do with Holsts' Planets?

Yes. Holst was the main inspiration for this piece and some movements like Mercury, Jupiter, and Saturn have similarities to the same movements in Holst, and others like Venus and Mars are opposite that of Holst in my suite. For Mercury, the similarities to Holst are:

• 6/8 time signature
• Smaller orchestra
• Sharps/Flats key contrast -> though this is also different in terms of scale, Instrumental in Holst, non-repeating Binary Form in my suite
• Hemiolas and other complex rhythms
• Fast tempo
• Some harmonic dissonance, but not a lot compared to one of the other movements.

As for the opposites, you know how Holst's Mars is basically a 5/4 march through hell with all that dissonance, even atonality and Holst's Venus is relatively bare in comparison, peaceful, almost melancholic, and more consonant? In my suite, those are reversed, so Venus is the dissonant march through hell and Mars is the instrumentally barren and more consonant of the 2 movements.

Those similarities and opposites come from one thing, Holst going with the Astrology/Mythology interpretation and me going with the Astronomy interpretation. Sometimes they align quite a bit, like with Mercury and sometimes they don't align at all like with Venus and Mars.

And I'm also including Earth and Pluto in my suite, which Holst never bothered to do.

[kwokon987]

Hi, sorry for the late reply

After giving it another listen, I think there is just a large stylistic difference between how we conceptually compose.

• My only points worth sharing, is that a lot happens in the first few bars. A lot of lines in the WW which could each be a melody on its own. then immediately into a new style at m9, but before we can adjust, you start chugging us through lots of chord changes, before recapping again.
  • If your intention was to disorient then, I wish you were more committed to it in m1-8. 
    • it feels noncommittal because of the sustained Fr.Hn chords.
  • I feel that I need more time to adjust to the new rhythm in m9, at least 2 bars? Having a more caucus intro would make the new rhythm and timbre (piano) feel even more clear.
    • maybe solo piano for a bit? or pass the rhythm to the timp for a bit with an intro on fl. to m9 before bring in the piano?
  • the melodies in WW don't feel satisfying? because the middle of the phrase is a tonic function, but the end of it is a dominant function.
    • It almost feels like I want to swap the two entire orchestra phrases over (not exactly of course, you'd have to tweak it)
    • 
• I enjoyed m25-36 it was energising next to the static chord chugging. (like a train I suppose?)
• m37-38 didn't feel as epic as it could
  • maybe because the strings are in similar registers to the horns?
  • maybe because of the harmony between the horns? maybe do unison?

I feel like it'd be easier to just show you what I mean than to explain it,

(I'm really sorry if you're offended by me annotating the score like that- I know that some people can get really upset by this)

 

Overall, I really like the concept of your suite- I hope the astronomy interpretation really shines through! It's very refreshing to see someone with a unique perspective on composing, and I can hear it through your music. A lot of your interpretations on barren textures, and consonance contradict with my impressions and own ways of expression. You compose in a totally different way to me, so I'd definitely take all of my comments with a big grain of salt.

I'm excited to see where this goes 🙂 

 

PS: I still have a lot more to say, but this is enough for one reply lol