Woodwind Quartet

Hi all, 

I don't come on here as much these days admittedly. I have been very busy with various things and definitely need to engage more with the great community here. Since I last posted, I have jumped on board with Musescore4 - which is absolutely superb in my opinion. 

I would just like to share my ongoing project for this interested in my music. I have lately been quite taken by the chamber music of George Onslow and August Klughardt, who while adherents of the romantic style drew still on classical norms that I am most familiar with. 

My intention with this work is to create a sense of character for each instrument and evoke some kind of story being told. 

The form is standard sonata form for the first and second movements. The third will follow this in a similar fashion. 

This work will be submitted for a local music competition next year, so it would be great to hear anyone's thoughts should there be an area for improvement - doesn't need to be complex... In return I will look at providing some feedback to other users on here. I hope it is enjoyable at least...

PS - Second movement starts at 6:20 minutes 

https://musescore.com/user/69480886/scores/11637901 

Hi @Markus Boyd,

I like the vivacity of the first movement! The interactions between instruments is often great, like places in b.76 and the development section and coda.

The music really reminds me more of Mozart's style with the movement of the piece. 

What is the intention of the tonic minor introduction? The sequence is nice but I feel like it's relatively detached from the whole movement. Are the materials linked or there is a narrative of the piece?

For the transition from the 1st subject to the 2nd subject of the exposition I think having the medial caesura in a perfect cadence of the tonic key in b.57 with a fermata makes the music less motoric which doesn't match the overall character of the movement. For me I think reaching the half cadence of E major a more suitable choice here with materials linked with filler material, instead of having a fermata cutting off the sections. B.142 for me is more fluent since it reaches the half cadence of the goal A major, instead of a perfect cadence, even with a fermata.

Seeing the repeating sign in b.36 I think the exposition is going to be repeated but actually not. Maybe you can change it with double barline?

The section in b.66 I feel like you can add some counterpoint there, re-introducing elements from the introduction.

I will change the F natural in b.157 bassoon to a E sharp, and the B# in b.120 oboe to a C natural.

My favourite sections of the movement are definitely the development and the coda, as they are very interactive and moving forward there.

I will review the 2nd movement later! Thx for sharing!

Henry

3 hours ago, Henry Ng Tsz Kiu said:

 

1. What is the intention of the tonic minor introduction? The sequence is nice but I feel like it's relatively detached from the whole movement. Are the materials linked or there is a narrative of the piece?

2. For the transition from the 1st subject to the 2nd subject of the exposition I think having the medial caesura in a perfect cadence of the tonic key in b.57 with a fermata makes the music less motoric which doesn't match the overall character of the movement. For me I think reaching the half cadence of E major a more suitable choice here with materials linked with filler material, instead of having a fermata cutting off the sections. B.142 for me is more fluent since it reaches the half cadence of the goal A major, instead of a perfect cadence, even with a fermata.

3. Seeing the repeating sign in b.36 I think the exposition is going to be repeated but actually not. Maybe you can change it with double barline?

4. The section in b.66 I feel like you can add some counterpoint there, re-introducing elements from the introduction.

5. I will change the F natural in b.157 bassoon to a E sharp, and the B# in b.120 oboe to a C natural.

My favourite sections of the movement are definitely the development and the coda, as they are very interactive and moving forward there.

I will review the 2nd movement later! Thx for sharing!

Henry

 

1. Well, that’s a good observation. I had composed this slow introduction in advance of the subsequent work and it needed a purpose. In my experience, these introductions don’t necessarily need to be directly related; what’s important is there is dramatic contrast that leads into the tonality of the exposition. If as a listener this succeeds then mission accomplished, though if otherwise do be honest - maybe I can rework this. 
 

2. I intended this bit to be a little tongue in cheek. The flute part enters here in a “what about me?!” Fashion. In fact the motif itself is derived from Handel’s ‘sweet bird’ aria. I agree that it’s unconventional perhaps to commence the second subject in the manner, though the sudden shift in tonality to E major, I feel at least, lends well to narrative of the flute part suddenly taking control of the direction of the music. That is my justification at least! 
 

3. Noted, yes I decided against repeated sections for now. 
 

4. You’re right about this. I have been intending on spicing that section up and the suggestion with some material from my introduction is an interesting one!

5. Noted

Thank you for taking the time, Henry. Your comments are very helpful 
 

3 hours ago, Markus Boyd said:

Well, that’s a good observation. I had composed this slow introduction in advance of the subsequent work and it needed a purpose. In my experience, these introductions don’t necessarily need to be directly related; what’s important is there is dramatic contrast that leads into the tonality of the exposition. If as a listener this succeeds then mission accomplished, though if otherwise do be honest - maybe I can rework this. 

Yeah this is more my personal liking than a necessary requirement for introduction to be related to the main body of the movement. I am just too used to some Beethovaian treatment of the introduction, like his Pathetique Sonata or op.127, and I myself did this before in the 1st mov of my 2nd Clarinet Quintet. 

3 hours ago, Markus Boyd said:

2. I intended this bit to be a little tongue in cheek. The flute part enters here in a “what about me?!” Fashion. In fact the motif itself is derived from Handel’s ‘sweet bird’ aria. I agree that it’s unconventional perhaps to commence the second subject in the manner, though the sudden shift in tonality to E major, I feel at least, lends well to narrative of the flute part suddenly taking control of the direction of the music. That is my justification at least! 

I think the treatment of the material is fine, as you do the same in the recapitulation but with a half cadence. I do think the perfect cadence in A major and then a sudden modulation to E major abrupt. I think the narration of the appearence of the flute can still work in B major, as the half cadence of E major and it makes the passage more fluent.

Henry

On 11/4/2023 at 9:20 AM, Markus Boyd said:

I would just like to share my ongoing project for this interested in my music. I have lately been quite taken by the chamber music of George Onslow and August Klughardt, who while adherents of the romantic style drew still on classical norms that I am most familiar with. 

My intention with this work is to create a sense of character for each instrument and evoke some kind of story being told. 

  Markus--

   I really enjoyed this!

        You mention Onslow-- I love his chamber music.  As Henry mentions, this is more Mozartian/Classical than I would identify with Onslow (certainly mature Onslow).  That said, it is a solid piece.

   A few comments:

The intro is almost Baroque in its tone, and seems a real mismatch for what follows.  A "custom" opening might serve this piece well.   Anticipating my next comment---a more chordal/fanfare/block chord kind of treatment might offset and highlight what follows well by means of contrast--avoiding DBC--"Death by Counterpoint".

which brings up...

Contrast.     One of the reasons I really love the romantic period idiom is the flexibility and expanded expressiveness---while integrating counterpoint, classical phrasing.   Your piece stands on its own, but perhaps there is room for more contrast with the counterpoint?  WWOD?    ("What would Onslow Do?"--its a thing now with the kids...).   That said--your counterpoint is wonderful!

Bar 40.: missed opportunity with the Bassoon?   It just struck me that a moving bassline with 3rds might serve well here and really make this section pop.  Anyhow, it is out of character with your writing for the rest of the piece.

        The piece deserves more of my attention, but these are things that struck me, right or wrong.      Overall a great piece of music!!   I'm currently flubbing my opportunities for counterpoint in my PQ---I keep saying "In the development!  In the development!..." We shall see.  Yet again you set a very, very high bar!

  Thanks for posting!

@Rich thanks a lot. It is a pleasure to share each other's work. 

The piece by Onslow I am referencing is his op 81 (wind quintet). I agree his style is much more romantic and adventurous when it comes to harmony. 

However, I am quite taken by the conversational tone of his music. And I just love woodwind instruments. 

Until next time 🙂 

I think this is quite successful.  If you want the instruments to feel like characters and have a sense of a storyline, that feels very possible.  Just decide on the details and let that guide your decisions going forward with the next movement.  Personally, I feel like I'm watching/listening to different species of competing birds on a pond on a lovely spring day. 🙂

Hi @Markus Boyd,

I am going to review the second movement! I didn't do so earlier because I was stopped by a great book...

I think this movement is more in baroque style with those suspensions. It really reminds me of the Air of Bach's Orchestral Suite no.3 with the pacing and the bassoon acting like a cello here.

What will be the musical expression for this movement?

For the last cadence it's interesting you are using a common progression there (V/vi to I) to modulate to the next movement. I think maybe going for faster tempo for the 3rd movement Scherzo will be better? Also it can be less interesting if all the movements are in sonata form, especially for a Scherzo since lots of passages are inevitably repeated only to fulfill the sonata scheme. I did that in the Scherzo 2nd movement of my Clarinet Quintet in C minor and now I feel like I maybe should rather use a scherzo and trio there, since I feel like the recapitulation a bit boring too as @Omicronrg9 noted.

Thx for sharing! Looking forward to your final product!

Henry

On 11/10/2023 at 3:26 AM, Henry Ng Tsz Kiu said:

Hi @Markus Boyd,

I am going to review the second movement! I didn't do so earlier because I was stopped by a great book...

I think this movement is more in baroque style with those suspensions. It really reminds me of the Air of Bach's Orchestral Suite no.3 with the pacing and the bassoon acting like a cello here.

What will be the musical expression for this movement?

For the last cadence it's interesting you are using a common progression there (V/vi to I) to modulate to the next movement. I think maybe going for faster tempo for the 3rd movement Scherzo will be better? Also it can be less interesting if all the movements are in sonata form, especially for a Scherzo since lots of passages are inevitably repeated only to fulfill the sonata scheme. I did that in the Scherzo 2nd movement of my Clarinet Quintet in C minor and now I feel like I maybe should rather use a scherzo and trio there, since I feel like the recapitulation a bit boring too as @Omicronrg9 noted.

Thx for sharing! Looking forward to your final product!

Henry

 

 

 

Thanks Henry. 

Yes, this movement is more baroque in its style, but also has elements of early classical. 

I experimented a little with the minor mode towards the end of the exposition, with which I tried to create an ominously charged sentiment but which returns to fresh pastures. 

Ultimately the style is idiosyncratic of baroque and classical idioms, and the slow movement provides a reflective contrast to the more vibrant firs movement.

On your comment regarding form of the third movement, I had in fact considered writing a rondo but the ideas I currently have do lean towards sonata form. It was quite common for all movements of wider works to be in sonata form in the classical era, with exception to dance oriented ones (minute, scherzo). I suppose whether or not that becomes a detracting factor depends on how well it is executed. 

13 hours ago, Markus Boyd said:

On your comment regarding form of the third movement, I had in fact considered writing a rondo but the ideas I currently have do lean towards sonata form. It was quite common for all movements of wider works to be in sonata form in the classical era, with exception to dance oriented ones (minute, scherzo). I suppose whether or not that becomes a detracting factor depends on how well it is executed. 

Yeah, what form will you plan to have for the 4th movement? I think adding some varieties on forms help vary the whole piece a bit.

I’m sorry for the late update in this. I had completed the work towards the end of December, and uploaded to my YouTube channel directly from MuseScore. 
 

There have been since some changes, namely a replacement of the slow introduction to something better suited, in my view, to the subsequent early-classical orientated movement. 
 

The final, third movement has also been completed (more or less). 
 

I hope people on here will find enjoyment in the work. I personally feel the reflective interlude that is the second movement is well contrasted with the final, upbeat and (perhaps) witty finale. Do let me know how you interpret it. 
 

ps - I have entered into the competition already. I’ll inform the topic of the adjudicator’s comments once available!

Hey @Markus Boyd,

I have listened to the last movement and I really like the Scherzo! My favourite passage is of course that C# minor one in b.341 and I hope it will be longer! Also I really think your new introduction more fitting than the old one. Hopefully you get some good comments from the adjudicators! All the best!

Henry

8 minutes ago, Henry Ng Tsz Kiu said:

Hey @Markus Boyd,

I have listened to the last movement and I really like the Scherzo! My favourite passage is of course that C# minor one in b.341 and I hope it will be longer! Also I really think your new introduction more fitting than the old one. Hopefully you get some good comments from the adjudicators! All the best!

Henry

 

Many thanks, Henry! Well, it was becoming a lot of work for me so it was important I finished it. Also, I am hesitant in producing over-lengthly music, given that, statistically, most people will not listen to more than 3 minutes XD! 

7 minutes ago, Markus Boyd said:

Well, it was becoming a lot of work for me so it was important I finished it.

Haha yeah! Beware of getting post partum syndrome after finishing a big work! Now maybe just time to rest a bit and not getting physically sick!!

7 minutes ago, Markus Boyd said:

Also, I am hesitant in producing over-lengthly music, given that, statistically, most people will not listen to more than 3 minutes XD! 

Yeah this is true, like all of my music LoL!!

Henry

really interesting piece ! i love that baroque/classical vibe

ur suspensions are beautiful

was expecting an interrupted cadance bar 186 ^^

bar 316 to 318 wtf x)

2 hours ago, Louis dB said:

really interesting piece ! i love that baroque/classical vibe

ur suspensions are beautiful

was expecting an interrupted cadance bar 186 ^^

bar 316 to 318 wtf x)

 

Hehe, thanks Louis. And bars 316-318... I think I was just being a little cheeky there. I would be interested to hear if it actually playable XD. I will have a look at your work soon, I saw you had uploaded... 

Hey there

Great work here! It's always refreshing to hear clear cut forms, easily to follow along scores, direction in harmonic language, etc. You know, composer stuff. You should be very proud of this piece, competition success or not. For me your music shows so much thought and care being put into it, and if you keep that up you'll continue to grow into a voice you're destined for. 

Is this your normal style? Classical style, but maybe a sprinkle of a modern type of cadence here and there? It's very nice, I don't think I've heard much from you but will check out some other works. 

Do you have any goals with composition? What's next for Markus?

Thanks for sharing this, it was fun to listen to all the way through! I'll leave you with some random thoughts:

 - very nice balance between all of the instruments!

 - clarinet slurs at m.45 and 46?

 - the trills sometimes sound off with the software you're using. Maybe try creating invisible 64th notes or whatever to have the playback be more accurate? minor detail

 - I loved all of the developing of your themes and material, but sometimes it felt like your ideas were too "fleeting". Often you would introduce a cool rhythm or motif, but it wasn't developed further. I just found myself liking certain parts but they were gone too quick

 - like I said, score looks fantastic

 - pedal tone sections were very cool, I wish they were expanded!

12 hours ago, Thatguy v2.0 said:

Hey there

Great work here! It's always refreshing to hear clear cut forms, easily to follow along scores, direction in harmonic language, etc. You know, composer stuff. You should be very proud of this piece, competition success or not. For me your music shows so much thought and care being put into it, and if you keep that up you'll continue to grow into a voice you're destined for. 

Is this your normal style? Classical style, but maybe a sprinkle of a modern type of cadence here and there? It's very nice, I don't think I've heard much from you but will check out some other works. 

Do you have any goals with composition? What's next for Markus?

Thanks for sharing this, it was fun to listen to all the way through! I'll leave you with some random thoughts:

 - very nice balance between all of the instruments!

 - clarinet slurs at m.45 and 46?

 - the trills sometimes sound off with the software you're using. Maybe try creating invisible 64th notes or whatever to have the playback be more accurate? minor detail

 - I loved all of the developing of your themes and material, but sometimes it felt like your ideas were too "fleeting". Often you would introduce a cool rhythm or motif, but it wasn't developed further. I just found myself liking certain parts but they were gone too quick

 - like I said, score looks fantastic

 - pedal tone sections were very cool, I wish they were expanded!

 

That’s for your comments. And I’m glad you found it fun… that’s what I was gauging for. 
As for your questions…

1. My style: Above all, I do tend to adhere to a galant idiom, whether that be baroque or classical in orientation. However, I did find with this piece, in particular, that as I developed the ideas, I was adding mild twists here and there. Maybe, as you say, that is my ‘voice’ coming through. I do also think that when I focus on the individuality of each instrument - like characters in a play - I am prompted to add a little wit or deviance here and there. And that essentially makes the music more programmatic, even without an explicit scene to depict. To that end, I have been particularly influenced by the wind quintets of mid Romantic composers George Onslow and Klughardt (see op 79 and 81 respectively). In summary, I’m sort of putting together a wide range of forms and idioms spanning 1720-1880, while retaining, of course, common practice in my approach to harmony and voice leading, in addition to use of sonata form. 
 

2. What’s next? I want to branch out into orchestral works. With chamber music, I can afford to focus and craft skills in four part counterpoint, characterisation and form (the latter being the most challenging). Having done so for a long time now, though, I’ve neglected skills in orchestration. So that’s my next step. I have actually posted my next project in the incomplete works forum if you want to hear. 
 

I note your other comments, too. Thanks for your time in providing such comprehensive feedback. These works do not take a short time… I’ve probably plowed 150-200 hours into this! 

Take care…

You've had plenty of comments and all I can really add is congratulations on this accomplished work, much in keeping with your predilections you described elsewhere. There are times when I turn to music like this that makes metric and developmental sense and it was most enjoyable, light and airy for the most part.

Your clear grasp of the instruments and their capabilities shows along with your abilities with accompaniment. The score engraving is clear and easy to read. There were nice touches like an appoggiatura I spotted and the varied articulations that came over well in the rendering.

The only thing that failed me was the square fermata. I presumed that was a stylised pause appropriate to the 'period' of the piece. First time I've seen that....must be my sheltered life! Oh, and that the Oboe part, bar 139, was missing it's last note. Perhaps others have mentioned that.

Altogether, enjoyable to listen to.

1 hour ago, Quinn said:

You've had plenty of comments and all I can really add is congratulations on this accomplished work, much in keeping with your predilections you described elsewhere. There are times when I turn to music like this that makes metric and developmental sense and it was most enjoyable, light and airy for the most part.

Your clear grasp of the instruments and their capabilities shows along with your abilities with accompaniment. The score engraving is clear and easy to read. There were nice touches like an appoggiatura I spotted and the varied articulations that came over well in the rendering.

The only thing that failed me was the square fermata. I presumed that was a stylised pause appropriate to the 'period' of the piece. First time I've seen that....must be my sheltered life! Oh, and that the Oboe part, bar 139, was missing it's last note. Perhaps others have mentioned that.

Altogether, enjoyable to listen to.

 

Thanks, Quinn. I appreciate your insights. 

Regarding the square fermata, I used it purely because I hadn’t understood how to lengthen ordinary fermatas on MuseScore. On notion 6, which i had used prior to MuseScore, that was really quite simple. So the square fermata simply served the duration of pause I had intended for the computerized playback 🙂