Composers' Forum

Music Composers Unite!

I have written a lot of verses in my life and it is a big race for me to try setting to music as many as I can.

A lot of songs result, usually accompanied by chamber ensembles or just one instrument. Eventually they form themselves into cycles or bigger units and into complete stories. That is why I put a hierarchical header on most of my scores giving the exact address of each item.

Sometimes I feel that a cycle or something similar should be proceeded by an instrumental piece and thus I write some overtures usually based on themes taken from the songs it introduces. This is the case here with a Valse in Am and a fugue in A. All themes of both pieces are taken from two of the songs that follow and for which I feel that the lyrics did not convey the whole of what I wanted to say.

Any comments and constructive criticism are welcome.

Thanks for listening.

Views: 344

Attachments:

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hi, Socrates. I only listened the first 2 minutes. You might want to have a second look at measure 23. It doesn't sound right.

The orchestration could improve a lot if you kept the woodwinds closer to each other. Doubling in octaves is more an 'epic' film music trick and that's probably not what you want. I get the feeling you would like to build a 'classical' sound. May I suggest this link to you?

http://northernsounds.com/forum/forumdisplay.php/77-Principles-of-O...

It's based on "Principles of Orchestration' by Nikolay Rimsky-Korsakov.

Hello! I listened to it through and liked it. Maybe there was overuse of doubling like the previous poster said but it did not bother me (due to my lack of experience with classical style and orchestration). The themes kept me interested but I like the Valse part more out of the two. Rowy's link is full of valuable information and worth bookmarking.

Rowy,

Perhaps you will do Socrates the courtesy of listening to the entire piece sometime.

Socrates,
It's quite a charming piece. I might not have orchestrated it the same way you did, but your intent came across just fine as it is. Thanks for posting this.

@ Rowy & Lasse.

Thank you both guys for your comments and suggestions.

Rowy, at bar 23, taking into account the melody and where it's going in the next bar, which chord would you suggest?

The way I see it is as a B chord in 1st inversion (dominant of the dominant relationship) and the reason I use the first inversion rather than root position is because the bass progresses from the previous bar in ascending semitones : D-D#-E. The other alternative that I considered there was an augmented 6th chord (simple Italian version I like better in this harmonic context, F-A-D#, with the aug.6th resolving to 8ve Es by contrary motion), but I did not use this in this case cause I'd have to give up either my bass or my melody note which I was not willing to.

It's years since I had a look at Korsakov's book. Thanks for the link, I bookmarked it, meanwhile I have found Walter Piston's take on the subject equally informative and in many cases more up to date.

Actually my artistic aim was not to create film music (I don’t know anything about it) or a classical texture for that matter, but only a piece which people would like to dance to and then enjoy a drink and conversation in a fugal background. :-)

 

@ Bob, thanks for your kind words and appreciation.

Socrates,

I suggest Rowy was referring to a bar with a 'bum' note in it and there are at least another couple of occasions where 'bum' notes are sounding in the waltz. My question to you is, have you listened through the piece and when doing so did you not notice them yourself? I suggest removing these notes would do the trick. Other than that, if you enjoyed creating this piece then it's 'job done'. 

Ray

Perhaps you would like to point me to these "bum" notes either on the video or the pdf... (I was replying to Rowy's statment that bar 23 doesn't sound right).

I wouldn't change the orchestration in that regard, I think played IRL it'd sound great. When I say it's "simple" that's not an insult, it's simple in the sense that Mozart is often "simple" - everything's where it needs to be, very spare and effective. You might kill the oboe player though (and for that matter horn and trumpet), there's often not much room for breath.

As for wrong notes, or notes I would class as wrong, there are a lot - generally high notes - unsure if it's writing or midi. For example, first beat b210 in Ov 1.

Rowy van Hest said:

Hi, Socrates. I only listened the first 2 minutes. You might want to have a second look at measure 23. It doesn't sound right.

The orchestration could improve a lot if you kept the woodwinds closer to each other. Doubling in octaves is more an 'epic' film music trick and that's probably not what you want. I get the feeling you would like to build a 'classical' sound. May I suggest this link to you?

http://northernsounds.com/forum/forumdisplay.php/77-Principles-of-O...

It's based on "Principles of Orchestration' by Nikolay Rimsky-Korsakov.

Socrates,
I could tell you exactly where I'm hearing what I consider wrong notes but seriously, if you can't hear them then there is no point in me or anyone else being specific. Going forward in music, it is impossible to fix something if you can't detect the need to do so with your own ears.

Ray

Ray, stop trolling my thread, go for a walk, it would help your constipated system.

After a peek at the score, I knew what to expect and I wasn't wrong. However, I did him the courtesy of listening to it for 2 minutes.


Bob Porter said:

Rowy,

Perhaps you will do Socrates the courtesy of listening to the entire piece sometime.

Socrates,
It's quite a charming piece. I might not have orchestrated it the same way you did, but your intent came across just fine as it is. Thanks for posting this.

Socrates, English is not my native language and I couldn't come up with the right word, but apparently I meant there's a 'bum' note in measure 23. Perhaps 'typo' means the same. It has nothing to do with the chord.

Socrates Arvanitakis said:

@ Rowy & Lasse.

Thank you both guys for your comments and suggestions.

Rowy, at bar 23, taking into account the melody and where it's going in the next bar, which chord would you suggest?

The way I see it is as a B chord in 1st inversion (dominant of the dominant relationship) and the reason I use the first inversion rather than root position is because the bass progresses from the previous bar in ascending semitones : D-D#-E. The other alternative that I considered there was an augmented 6th chord (simple Italian version I like better in this harmonic context, F-A-D#, with the aug.6th resolving to 8ve Es by contrary motion), but I did not use this in this case cause I'd have to give up either my bass or my melody note which I was not willing to.

It's years since I had a look at Korsakov's book. Thanks for the link, I bookmarked it, meanwhile I have found Walter Piston's take on the subject equally informative and in many cases more up to date.

Actually my artistic aim was not to create film music (I don’t know anything about it) or a classical texture for that matter, but only a piece which people would like to dance to and then enjoy a drink and conversation in a fugal background. :-)

 

@ Bob, thanks for your kind words and appreciation.

Erm... I don't understand. Do you want to know from me which notes are 'bum' notes? As I recall you forgot to put a sharp before a D in one of the voices. Wait... I'll have a look at the score.

I was right. In measure 23 you forgot a sharp in the part for the second violins. But I would like to suggest that you first listen to that measure as it is, then change it, and then listen again. You must hear the difference.

I understand what Ray is saying. If it sounds good to your ears, then you should leave it alone, but that's only true in general and after you've taken some distance, for instance by not listening to the score for at least a week.

This however is a mistake, a 'bum' note, a 'typo'. You will have to correct it.

After a while, if you've taken some distance, you would have heard this mistake (and others) yourself. There's nothing wrong with your hearing.



Socrates Arvanitakis said:

Perhaps you would like to point me to these "bum" notes either on the video or the pdf... (I was replying to Rowy's statment that bar 23 doesn't sound right).

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2017   Created by Chris Merritt.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service