I've never bothered putting up my limited forays into solo piano music up on the web before as I was never very happy with my endeavours. And piano music is anyway the most commonly posted form by amateurs. But the latest set of four works seems to me to be a step forward in various respects, including the recording where I have used the soulful VSL Vienna Imperial piano. There is something of a stylistic mixture between almost classical and almost atonal in all the works. Will be interesting to see if anyone responds to this particular idiom.
The best of these works in my view is the second, no.7. It's also the longest. I've put this one separately on Box temporarily for anyone who might be curious but doesn't have time to listen to the whole collection here https://app.box.com/s/e9v01e03pdk4fwbv7su153ska4vyn1w4
The set is on Reelcrafter here https://play.reelcrafter.com/dko22/latestworks
Replies
Apologies I haven't been on to reply until now. The reason I asked for a score - really - was, here and there, to find out how you did it! I'm a mediocre pianist myself but did beaver away at a couple of Liszt studies and the "Summertime" episode from Earl Wilde's "Porgy and Bess Fantasy", the latter in particular to work out how he suspended the melody between both hands. The whole work is so difficult and that particular chunk was bad enough!
I wanted to develop greater fluidity at the keyboard for composing. I predate daws and sample libraries so it was all done on paper - a practice I've kept. Plus I've learned much through score study.
So, thank you for your offer and I'll send my email details tomorrow.
Cheers,
Ivor
I had a wee look at these scores yesterday and made one or two changes, mostly to no.6. In theory now, everything should be more or less playable (taking into account use of the pedal to sustain notes in one or two passages when fingers have to leap elsewhere) and it will be interesting to see if I've missed anything completely glaring (as opposed to simply difficult). I programmed Dorico to write atonally throughout so the enharmonic spelling has been decided according to its rules but with elimination of all double accidentals as most seem to hate reading these, even when they are grammatically correct.
We can discuss further if you still want to look at this.
Hi David,
I just finished listening to these now. You have a nice collection of piano nocturnes here. They almost present themselves as a suite or a continuous work to some capacity, because I personally perceive relevant thematic material from one nocturne to the next.
I enjoyed the 6th the most, primarily because I found it more accessible than the others in a variety of ways. It had a clearer structure to me, along with a recognizable theme and idea that I think is admittedly more absorbable to the average listener than in the other pieces. The 9th had some very interesting harmonic progressions towards the end that I enjoyed.
Regarding the attempt at a language that transitioned at will from late romantic classical harmony to atonal harmony and ideas; at times I feel you effectively pulled this off, while at other moments it's not quite as convincing to my ears. To be fair, though, I don't tend to listen to or study much music in the atonal fashion, so I can only really comment as a listener on how I perceived it.
I know you are self-taught, and it leads me to wonder how you go about writing your works. I know for some pieces, you state there is no formal consideration of theory or planning, but I don't want to draw that assumption for all your work. In your self-teaching, regarding advanced theory or concepts that you have covered, how exactly does that work? If you've covered those topics in detail, I wonder how one "polices" themselves in a self-learning environment or how they monitor their understanding of a given concept without a teacher or authoritative figure involved.
About your last comment to Ivor, I can't help but suggest that a polished and approachable score (with practical challenges already vetted) could potentially make a significant difference in attracting higher caliber musicians to perform or be drawn to your works from a score-reading perspective. They may not take rough, working scores upfront or as seriously for a multitude of obvious reasons. If the intention is truly to want someone to play the work, I would think the score should present as "approachable" as possible from the get-go, but then again, this may not even be your intention at all.
Hi David many thanks for listening and your detailed comments. For me, the 6th is probably the least interesting of the pieces although I was reasonably satisfied with it after writing it. It seems more conventional than the others, except possibly no. 7 which is arguably the most classical in spirit but I feel has the most harmony between means and ends and a certain profundity without trying to force the issue which I occasionally feel is a problem in no. 9 for instance. My wife immediately agreed but everyone else to date has a different taste - which is fine, of course.
My works generally write themselves which is why it took only a week for the last three Nocturnes. I have an idea what I'm trying to express and then the muse and my instincts and experience take over. Of course in some works there are specific plans and things I'm trying to achieve on a technical level but I don't think that's the case here.
As for the score, it is generally perfectly neat and tidy as it usually the case with competently produced Dorico scores. The thing most people dislike is its tendency towards double accidentals in the enharmonic spelling, particularly when no key signature is specified. I've corrected this sort of thing in the cases where musicians actually really want to seriously look at the scores but I'm not specifically aiming at performance (if I was, I'd likely write something simpler and carefully check the playability)
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next