You Broke Me

Dropping my latest piece! It’s a big one for me, and a totally new flavor for me as a composer. Would love to hear thoughts

score: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/zzflevf46gpyxbc2p6l12/You-Broke-Me-Score.pdf?rlkey=rlnn05xdt8iris14g7qgjlu3w&dl=0

Can you attach the score?

48 minutes ago, maestrowick said:

Can you attach the score?

 

 

It is now linked.

Wow.  It's obvious you have some serious chops. I'm going to go in my professor mode as I analyze this.

This piece is VERY VERY VERY hard, which you already know.  It gives me some serious George Crumb vibes (whose scores I can NOT find right now.  I really wanted to compare and contrast some of the great things you do to his.)

Not only is it written in the hardest way possible, your woodwind parts seem to hang on the extreme and virtuosic tessitura of the horn. For example: Those constant C7s are difficult and will take over.  It won't blend AT ALL. It's also taxing.   It's the nature of the instrument in that register.  At Meas. 155, the piccolo part will be basically inaudible.   D is the lowest note on the piccolo and it will not project under no circumstances.  Take that up an octave.  

I can tell you have serious chops on your horn also.  I don't know many who love the Eb clarinet: yourself (obviously), Benjamin Adler, and Stuart Bogie are the few that come to mind.  That Gb in the Baritone Sax is also extreme (Meas. 30) and also register (Meas. 5) . Of course, Taimar Sullivan can play anything (PRISM Quartet), but remember the baritone sax isn't canon for the orchestra.  I wonder (I know it isn't the same) if you would write the parts for Bb clarinet and bassoon instead.  That would at least give this piece an attempt at more playability.  Have what you want as a substitution.   I'm a euphoniumist, I get WHY you want to do it; however, budgets are real for orchestras.

Meas 3: Violin II:  You can't really slide from Ab3 to G3. A to Ab? YESSIR. Ab -G?  Hmmm...I guess the finger could go off the board but it won't be probably what you are looking for.

Meas. 150 (piano): fix your enharmonics.  The classic rule of thumb is you don't mix sharps and flats (Exc. harp). Since you have C5 in the violin, write the LH as Db-Gb and the RH as Db E F Gb.

Meas 18 flute: man....that's hard.

Bass Clarinet: I guess we're assuming every orchestra will have a C foot? More common to find a baritone sax with an A foot than Bass clarinet with a C foot. Take all this with a grain of salt.

Rehearsal No. 8: Flute:  b# is the devil, make those ascending notes Db and C natural and then later Eb.  It's really no need for those sharps although Is see why you did it.  Most of those notes in that measure are already flat. 

Violinists in general don't think like we wind players think.  They don't like 8va's.  They rather see it at pitch.  It's so weird.  This seems to be the case with all my violin friends.  Bassists are ok, but violinist, violists, and cellist?  At pitch.  I have no idea why, they're just like that.  Take all this with a grain of salt.

Errata:  No bass part?  I would still write one.  Since this will get play by an orchestra, have a bass part.  Trust me, you'll love.  Even if you just double the cello.  Have it!

It seems as though you use intervals as your motif.  Nice!  I love the way you develop that.  I also love your sound spectrum in this piece. 

My $0.02.  Take all this with a grain of salt.

8 hours ago, maestrowick said:

Wow.  It's obvious you have some serious chops. I'm going to go in my professor mode as I analyze this.

This piece is VERY VERY VERY hard, which you already know.  It gives me some serious George Crumb vibes (whose scores I can NOT find right now.  I really wanted to compare and contrast some of the great things you do to his.)

Not only is it written in the hardest way possible, your woodwind parts seem to hang on the extreme and virtuosic tessitura of the horn. For example: Those constant C7s are difficult and will take over.  It won't blend AT ALL. It's also taxing.   It's the nature of the instrument in that register.  At Meas. 155, the piccolo part will be basically inaudible.   D is the lowest note on the piccolo and it will not project under no circumstances.  Take that up an octave.  

I can tell you have serious chops on your horn also.  I don't know many who love the Eb clarinet: yourself (obviously), Benjamin Adler, and Stuart Bogie are the few that come to mind.  That Gb in the Baritone Sax is also extreme (Meas. 30) and also register (Meas. 5) . Of course, Taimar Sullivan can play anything (PRISM Quartet), but remember the baritone sax isn't canon for the orchestra.  I wonder (I know it isn't the same) if you would write the parts for Bb clarinet and bassoon instead.  That would at least give this piece an attempt at more playability.  Have what you want as a substitution.   I'm a euphoniumist, I get WHY you want to do it; however, budgets are real for orchestras.

Meas 3: Violin II:  You can't really slide from Ab3 to G3. A to Ab? YESSIR. Ab -G?  Hmmm...I guess the finger could go off the board but it won't be probably what you are looking for.

Meas. 150 (piano): fix your enharmonics.  The classic rule of thumb is you don't mix sharps and flats (Exc. harp). Since you have C5 in the violin, write the LH as Db-Gb and the RH as Db E F Gb.

Meas 18 flute: man....that's hard.

Bass Clarinet: I guess we're assuming every orchestra will have a C foot? More common to find a baritone sax with an A foot than Bass clarinet with a C foot. Take all this with a grain of salt.

Rehearsal No. 8: Flute:  b# is the devil, make those ascending notes Db and C natural and then later Eb.  It's really no need for those sharps although Is see why you did it.  Most of those notes in that measure are already flat. 

Violinists in general don't think like we wind players think.  They don't like 8va's.  They rather see it at pitch.  It's so weird.  This seems to be the case with all my violin friends.  Bassists are ok, but violinist, violists, and cellist?  At pitch.  I have no idea why, they're just like that.  Take all this with a grain of salt.

Errata:  No bass part?  I would still write one.  Since this will get play by an orchestra, have a bass part.  Trust me, you'll love.  Even if you just double the cello.  Have it!

 

It seems as though you use intervals as your motif.  Nice!  I love the way you develop that.  I also love your sound spectrum in this piece. 

My $0.02.  Take all this with a grain of salt.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hey thanks for all of this. My teacher and I really threw out playability as a concern just because I ALWAYS try to write for the players. This was his teaching tool to get me composing differently and have nothing holding back my ideas. I kinda came to terms 1/2 through writing this was really hard and idk who would ever play it, but now I just want it to be a representation of me as a composer today. 

I can go fix enharmonics. Though, my goal was to make it easier to read note to note rather than having the chords match up between all instruments. This is what has been put into my head from what I’ve been taught.

The violin 8va thing is weird, but okay. At the least, I’ll keep them in the score.

Maybe for the next ACO Earshot I’ll spend a couple days adding /substituting parts to make it a more real “orchestra piece.” I justvhave no idea where this would get played except by some really niche, really tight contemporary group. And even then, there’s a lot of competition for easier music. I am just hoping this can be a stepping stone to lead to more opportunities being open. Thanks for your comments!

2 hours ago, Eickso said:

Hey thanks for all of this. My teacher and I really threw out playability as a concern just because I ALWAYS try to write for the players. This was his teaching tool to get me composing differently and have nothing holding back my ideas. I kinda came to terms 1/2 through writing this was really hard and idk who would ever play it, but now I just want it to be a representation of me as a composer today. 

I can go fix enharmonics. Though, my goal was to make it easier to read note to note rather than having the chords match up between all instruments. This is what has been put into my head from what I’ve been taught.

The violin 8va thing is weird, but okay. At the least, I’ll keep them in the score.

Maybe for the next ACO Earshot I’ll spend a couple days adding /substituting parts to make it a more real “orchestra piece.” I justvhave no idea where this would get played except by some really niche, really tight contemporary group. And even then, there’s a lot of competition for easier music. I am just hoping this can be a stepping stone to lead to more opportunities being open. Thanks for your comments!

 

RESPECT!    You'll be surprised by changing a few things how more accessible this piece can become.  It deserves to be played.  Not saying you per se, but I have seen egos keep great music from being played.   I had to deal with it myself when I was first working with vocalists.  Some hard lessons I had to learn.  My "ego" kept certain songs from being recorded. Once I humbled out, my music began to flourish.  I haven't made those conglomerate of mistakes in years.

Last point, in a republic, remember this:  he who holds the gold makes the rules.  So if orchestras won't spend money on certain things, we as composers have to acquiesce to these things.

This piece CAN be a part of the canon.  I humbly ask you to make those changes so it be routine.  This piece can win a plethora of contests with those adjustments.

I had a very interesting discord conversation about this piece that helped me to formulate what I'm going to say in this review.  I admire your fresh approach, inclusion of microtones and of all this huge plethora of percussion instruments that helped add more "noise" to the cacophony and chaos (which I think was your intention).  I expected something along the lines of Webern's total serialism or something but was pleasantly surprised since this kept my attention and was actually inspired rather than derived from serial rows or some other such atonal gimmick.  You had actual gestures that you deliberately sculpted much like Stravinsky would have sculpted his gestures.  Granted there seems to be more chaos to your gestures.  Stravinsky's music also could actually be hummed (or the rhythmic gestures can be performed by any amateur since they're quite accessible and memorable).  Stravinsky also included accessible folk melodies amidst his chaos which kept his music from totally losing control and becoming incomprehensible.  I don't think your music is totally incomprehensible either though.  Like for example, I think there is a clear climax towards the end of the piece that clearly signals to the listener that the piece is ending and it doesn't end in an arbitrary place.  And I like the short piano denouement that follows the climax - I think it fits.  But I do wonder if you could have achieved what you wanted to achieve (as in - pushing the envelope of the instruments and players capabilities) while also throwing in some more accessible elements.  I like the analogy of the video game - a good video game is neither too easy (or it would be boring without any challenge) nor too hard (or it would be frustrating and not fun).  Likewise, a good innovative musical composition that still hopes to gain popularity is neither too conservative (as that wouldn't add any novelty to the experience) nor too new and wild (as that loses the audience and potential of converting likely conservative listeners to your more liberal musical cause).  I'm not sure if my analogies and comparisons with Stravinsky are on point.  I think the points I make though will (in my opinion) be more likely to result in the composition of works with more lasting musical and historical value.  Let me know if you agree or not.  Thanks for sharing!

2 hours ago, PeterthePapercomPoser said:

I had a very interesting discord conversation about this piece that helped me to formulate what I'm going to say in this review.  I admire your fresh approach, inclusion of microtones and of all this huge plethora of percussion instruments that helped add more "noise" to the cacophony and chaos (which I think was your intention).  I expected something along the lines of Webern's total serialism or something but was pleasantly surprised since this kept my attention and was actually inspired rather than derived from serial rows or some other such atonal gimmick.  You had actual gestures that you deliberately sculpted much like Stravinsky would have sculpted his gestures.  Granted there seems to be more chaos to your gestures.  Stravinsky's music also could actually be hummed (or the rhythmic gestures can be performed by any amateur since they're quite accessible and memorable).  Stravinsky also included accessible folk melodies amidst his chaos which kept his music from totally losing control and becoming incomprehensible.  I don't think your music is totally incomprehensible either though.  Like for example, I think there is a clear climax towards the end of the piece that clearly signals to the listener that the piece is ending and it doesn't end in an arbitrary place.  And I like the short piano denouement that follows the climax - I think it fits.  But I do wonder if you could have achieved what you wanted to achieve (as in - pushing the envelope of the instruments and players capabilities) while also throwing in some more accessible elements.  I like the analogy of the video game - a good video game is neither too easy (or it would be boring without any challenge) nor too hard (or it would be frustrating and not fun).  Likewise, a good innovative musical composition that still hopes to gain popularity is neither too conservative (as that wouldn't add any novelty to the experience) nor too new and wild (as that loses the audience and potential of converting likely conservative listeners to your more liberal musical cause).  I'm not sure if my analogies and comparisons with Stravinsky are on point.  I think the points I make though will (in my opinion) be more likely to result in the composition of works with more lasting musical and historical value.  Let me know if you agree or not.  Thanks for sharing!

 

Woah, weird to hear I was being talked about and discussed. Would love to see that conversation. Is there some place on discord someone shared my work, because the YouTube link has been getting a lot more views than I thought it would?

These past few months, I actually have really clicked with improvisatory music and the idea of arranging soundscapes through less-controlled means. You are still able to construct a song with meaning, purpose, and structure, but the end result is something different than these written down / more controlled means of music-making give. In a big way, my approach to this piece was applying this new appreciation I have for sound arrangement into my written music.

Now, this piece was a direct order from my teacher to be designed to "win competitions," so he gave me a plethora of rules. I wasn't allowed to use box notation, because apparently it is more impressive to see everything written out note by note. I had to make it constantly attention grabbing, and it had to be at the highest quality output for any idea I wrote down. While so much of this piece is technically extremely difficult, it was my way of expressing this newfound improvisatory chaos that has been building inside of me. There is no way for any of these rhythms and gestures to be performed perfectly, but the intent behind the jumbledness (or togetherness, at times) allows for less stress beyond the notes IF it were to be performed.

When I was first starting this work, I was still in the process of being broken. I was still a bit scared for my supporters and possible listeners to be scared off by me leaning into what my teacher was pushing me to be. But, at one point, I realized I just want to create something more than happy minimalism. I want to create that really gritty gently caressed up stuff that just sounds cool (which is why I am so excited for the electroacoustic phase I can feel is about to happen with me). I am not saying I did that or not with this work, but I wanted to push myself to grow. I wanted to push myself really hard to implement my ideas in a mindset I had never done before. Everything displaced, everything muddied, and gestures / soundscapes that I experimentally crafted piece by piece.

I know there will be pieces beyond this one, and they will each have different intents and purposes behind them. But, I think for this one, it was for me primarily. I just wanted to really invest myself in this as an educational tool and form of self-expression, inviting people into what emotions I felt like conveying. In this case, I wanted to create something powerful, off the walls, anxiety-inducing, and constantly stressful.

Within every idea I had, there was an opportunity to keep it digestible and normal. But, that was the challenge of this work, and the namesake to it. To take every idea I would normally write and express it differently. I have elements of minimalism all throughout, but I just layered, spliced, deleted, and transposed a bunch of it in a way old Evan would scoff at. Each idea is still wholly me, but I could not cave in to doing it the lazy way in this piece. And, about a month and a half into the process (and two years of composition lessons TRYING to accept this teaching), it finally clicked for me. I could naturally write out these ideas in a way that fit the growing narrative of the work, and I could arrange the notes on the page to create what my heart sought in a section. 

I have honestly been pleasantly surprised to see any positive feedback to what I have created. It means a lot to have people open to listening, and from that, finding things within that speak to them. That is always what my music has been about, regardless of the maturity of how I express an idea. Thanks for taking the time to listen and write to me. Hopefully this string of thoughts gives some context to the work.

11 hours ago, Eickso said:

Woah, weird to hear I was being talked about and discussed. Would love to see that conversation. Is there some place on discord someone shared my work, because the YouTube link has been getting a lot more views than I thought it would?

These past few months, I actually have really clicked with improvisatory music and the idea of arranging soundscapes through less-controlled means. You are still able to construct a song with meaning, purpose, and structure, but the end result is something different than these written down / more controlled means of music-making give. In a big way, my approach to this piece was applying this new appreciation I have for sound arrangement into my written music.

Now, this piece was a direct order from my teacher to be designed to "win competitions," so he gave me a plethora of rules. I wasn't allowed to use box notation, because apparently it is more impressive to see everything written out note by note. I had to make it constantly attention grabbing, and it had to be at the highest quality output for any idea I wrote down. While so much of this piece is technically extremely difficult, it was my way of expressing this newfound improvisatory chaos that has been building inside of me. There is no way for any of these rhythms and gestures to be performed perfectly, but the intent behind the jumbledness (or togetherness, at times) allows for less stress beyond the notes IF it were to be performed.

When I was first starting this work, I was still in the process of being broken. I was still a bit scared for my supporters and possible listeners to be scared off by me leaning into what my teacher was pushing me to be. But, at one point, I realized I just want to create something more than happy minimalism. I want to create that really gritty gently caressed up stuff that just sounds cool (which is why I am so excited for the electroacoustic phase I can feel is about to happen with me). I am not saying I did that or not with this work, but I wanted to push myself to grow. I wanted to push myself really hard to implement my ideas in a mindset I had never done before. Everything displaced, everything muddied, and gestures / soundscapes that I experimentally crafted piece by piece.

I know there will be pieces beyond this one, and they will each have different intents and purposes behind them. But, I think for this one, it was for me primarily. I just wanted to really invest myself in this as an educational tool and form of self-expression, inviting people into what emotions I felt like conveying. In this case, I wanted to create something powerful, off the walls, anxiety-inducing, and constantly stressful.

Within every idea I had, there was an opportunity to keep it digestible and normal. But, that was the challenge of this work, and the namesake to it. To take every idea I would normally write and express it differently. I have elements of minimalism all throughout, but I just layered, spliced, deleted, and transposed a bunch of it in a way old Evan would scoff at. Each idea is still wholly me, but I could not cave in to doing it the lazy way in this piece. And, about a month and a half into the process (and two years of composition lessons TRYING to accept this teaching), it finally clicked for me. I could naturally write out these ideas in a way that fit the growing narrative of the work, and I could arrange the notes on the page to create what my heart sought in a section. 

I have honestly been pleasantly surprised to see any positive feedback to what I have created. It means a lot to have people open to listening, and from that, finding things within that speak to them. That is always what my music has been about, regardless of the maturity of how I express an idea. Thanks for taking the time to listen and write to me. Hopefully this string of thoughts gives some context to the work.

 

I LOVED how @PeterthePapercomPoser explained it!!   BRAVO!

14 hours ago, PeterthePapercomPoser said:

I had a very interesting discord conversation about this piece that helped me to formulate what I'm going to say in this review.  I admire your fresh approach, inclusion of microtones and of all this huge plethora of percussion instruments that helped add more "noise" to the cacophony and chaos (which I think was your intention).  I expected something along the lines of Webern's total serialism or something but was pleasantly surprised since this kept my attention and was actually inspired rather than derived from serial rows or some other such atonal gimmick.  You had actual gestures that you deliberately sculpted much like Stravinsky would have sculpted his gestures.  Granted there seems to be more chaos to your gestures.  Stravinsky's music also could actually be hummed (or the rhythmic gestures can be performed by any amateur since they're quite accessible and memorable).  Stravinsky also included accessible folk melodies amidst his chaos which kept his music from totally losing control and becoming incomprehensible.  I don't think your music is totally incomprehensible either though.  Like for example, I think there is a clear climax towards the end of the piece that clearly signals to the listener that the piece is ending and it doesn't end in an arbitrary place.  And I like the short piano denouement that follows the climax - I think it fits.  But I do wonder if you could have achieved what you wanted to achieve (as in - pushing the envelope of the instruments and players capabilities) while also throwing in some more accessible elements.  I like the analogy of the video game - a good video game is neither too easy (or it would be boring without any challenge) nor too hard (or it would be frustrating and not fun).  Likewise, a good innovative musical composition that still hopes to gain popularity is neither too conservative (as that wouldn't add any novelty to the experience) nor too new and wild (as that loses the audience and potential of converting likely conservative listeners to your more liberal musical cause).  I'm not sure if my analogies and comparisons with Stravinsky are on point.  I think the points I make though will (in my opinion) be more likely to result in the composition of works with more lasting musical and historical value.  Let me know if you agree or not.  Thanks for sharing!

 

Hmmm... this makes perfect sense.  How about this:  Now that the assignment is done, fix it how YOU want it and get it played!  I had to do that for several of my pieces to "pass."  I then went and did it the way I wanted, and it got played and my personal approval.