Composers' Forum

Music Composers Unite!

This is my attempt at a slower movement to follow another piece I posted earlier here.  Slower works are harder for me and
I struggled with this and still am not happy with parts of it.  So please feel free to criticize and make suggestions on any
part of this.  Thanks for listening.

Views: 85

Attachments:

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

This is my attempt at writing a slower movement to follow another piece I posted earlier here. Slower works are harder for me and I struggled with this and still am not happy with parts of it. So please feel free to criticize and make suggestions on any part of this .  Thanks for listening.

Hi Ingo,

I like the clarity of the work, it’s beautifully transparent and the score is a pleasure to read. You present a consistent atmosphere where I find lots of small surprises. One such surprise for instance, is the one in bar 34, the single celesta c.
In bar 29, Oboe E flat, Horn F and Trumpet G, I wonder how that sounds if you omit the Oboe and give the Horn the E flat and the trumpet the F.
Bar 22/23/24, you have chosen to write 2 connected quarter notes instead of one halve note in the Viola part, I was wondering if you had a reason for that.
Bar 39, nice!
The celesta is a beautiful instrument and you use it well but maybe from bar 79 the length of the solo may de-stabilise the balance in the piece a bit. If you give it a background of strings it may work slightly better?

Now we need to talk about bar 92 until the end. What inspired you to do it this way? I understand the change of coloration of the G. Can you tell me a bit more about your intention there?

It’s a lovely piece Ingo! Thanks for posting!

Hey, Ingo,

This is beautiful in its translucency, well-chosen small combinations of timbres from the ensemble pitted against fuller moments here and there, as in bar 39. I also liked the surprise transition in bar 28. You have a knack with scoring all right!

Unless my memory is failing (highly probable) you apply short imitative entries to carry the work forward as you have in the past. It has a most natural feel to it. You also make good use of  silence and quiet moments. Otherwise it seems through composed.

I'm inclined to agree with Joost about the celeste, a beautiful solo. Taken in isolation it may seem a little long but I felt it was an expansion, continuation perhaps, of its use in the first piece of the suite. The space between its end and the long sustained G was a little obtrusive though and - just a suggestion - bringing that G back a couple of bars to overlap with the celeste. It may mean some reworking of the celeste part but if you've happy with it as it is....fine!

Two things concerned me about that ending - it's length seems ok to me but conventionally may feel too long, roughly 50 seconds but the final stroke on the bells could maybe be a little closer to the trombone? And the trombone itself - but I'm no expert here:- the player has to hold the note for about 18 seconds (4 1/2 bars at 60bpm). Is it possible and/or safe to expect that of a trombonist?  Probably is given the dynamic. An alternative would be to give the note to the trumpet in bar 99 to halfway through bar 101 and the trombone picking up at the start of 101.

All in all, a great piece that does contrast with the first piece. An interesting score. I'd love to hear this performed live. I reckon it would come across with sensitivity and allow more scope for dynamic nuance.

.Cheers for now.

Thank you Joost for you kind and detailed comments, they are very helpful. You mention trying some orchestration alternatives and this is the joy of orchestrating parts, to find what works for our ears. This is a strong point for NotePerformer, it gives us a good representation without all of the grunt work that other libraries require. That's also a disadvantage in that we have less control over the outcome.

Yes the tied 1/4 notes are a mistake. I try to catch those but don't always. I wanted to have the celesta solo accompanied but I couldn't make it work and still have the counterpoint audible. Celesta(s), at least in NP's version, are very rich and a bit unfocused which may be part of why they aren't more widely used.

The ending is problematic. I envisioned a very simple note that evolves and varies tonally and then resolves in an attractive fashion. Perhaps live players could pull it off, perhaps I should just change it!

Thanks again for your comments.

Joost Visser said:

Hi Ingo,

I like the clarity of the work, it’s beautifully transparent and the score is a pleasure to read. You present a consistent atmosphere where I find lots of small surprises. One such surprise for instance, is the one in bar 34, the single celesta c.
In bar 29, Oboe E flat, Horn F and Trumpet G, I wonder how that sounds if you omit the Oboe and give the Horn the E flat and the trumpet the F.
Bar 22/23/24, you have chosen to write 2 connected quarter notes instead of one halve note in the Viola part, I was wondering if you had a reason for that.
Bar 39, nice!
The celesta is a beautiful instrument and you use it well but maybe from bar 79 the length of the solo may de-stabilise the balance in the piece a bit. If you give it a background of strings it may work slightly better?

Now we need to talk about bar 92 until the end. What inspired you to do it this way? I understand the change of coloration of the G. Can you tell me a bit more about your intention there?

It’s a lovely piece Ingo! Thanks for posting!

Thank you Dane for the encouragement and suggestions, it means a lot.

Yes I did try to have some connection with the earlier piece, good catch, thank you. I try to through compose but I end up hacking, inserting and revising; without scoring software with instant feedback I'd be lost.

Yes, the celesta is part of the continuity effort and I had hoped for a blended solo feature but was unable to get a good result with the celesta notes clearly audible. So then I was attached to the solo and didn't want to modify it. I have the overextended ending and again I was unable to blend it well with the celesta so I just splashed it out there and kept you captured for a minute of questionable value. The original intent was for the end note to grow out of the celesta solo, evolve and vary tonally and then resolve attractively.  Possibly live players could make sense of it, possibly some reworking with a DAW and different library, or maybe just put in a ii-V-I and done!

Seriously though, your suggestions to help the poor trombonist and make sense of the ending are spot on and I will revisit this with that in mind because I'm not really happy with the ending at this point.

Thanks again for the help!

Dane Aubrun said:

Hey, Ingo,

This is beautiful in its translucency, well-chosen small combinations of timbres from the ensemble pitted against fuller moments here and there, as in bar 39. I also liked the surprise transition in bar 28. You have a knack with scoring all right!

Unless my memory is failing (highly probable) you apply short imitative entries to carry the work forward as you have in the past. It has a most natural feel to it. You also make good use of  silence and quiet moments. Otherwise it seems through composed.

I'm inclined to agree with Joost about the celeste, a beautiful solo. Taken in isolation it may seem a little long but I felt it was an expansion, continuation perhaps, of its use in the first piece of the suite. The space between its end and the long sustained G was a little obtrusive though and - just a suggestion - bringing that G back a couple of bars to overlap with the celeste. It may mean some reworking of the celeste part but if you've happy with it as it is....fine!

Two things concerned me about that ending - it's length seems ok to me but conventionally may feel too long, roughly 50 seconds but the final stroke on the bells could maybe be a little closer to the trombone? And the trombone itself - but I'm no expert here:- the player has to hold the note for about 18 seconds (4 1/2 bars at 60bpm). Is it possible and/or safe to expect that of a trombonist?  Probably is given the dynamic. An alternative would be to give the note to the trumpet in bar 99 to halfway through bar 101 and the trombone picking up at the start of 101.

All in all, a great piece that does contrast with the first piece. An interesting score. I'd love to hear this performed live. I reckon it would come across with sensitivity and allow more scope for dynamic nuance.

.Cheers for now.

Ingo, going along with the continuity idea it might be worth thinking what the next piece will be (assuming there is one) before doing anything with the ending of this piece.

Can I ask if you've wondered how many pieces the set will comprise?

Oh, and I really do feel your pain about Split and Glue, Cut and Paste. I find I end up with quite a few saved "versions" in case I want to revert or copy from some previous version. (With Reaper copy from one version to another really is pain. Maybe there's an easy way that I've yet to discover but until I do, it's an Aspirin job!)

Thank you Dane for thinking of the continuity issue I have with these pieces. I have written a 3rd piece for this set but I didn't want to overwhelm our few reviewers here with more music; but I do have it posted here:

https://soundcloud.com/user-91321999/chamber-group-no-3

Beware of sudden tutti toward the end and well, another problematic ending.

If you are really afflicted with insomnia all three pieces can be heard here:

https://soundcloud.com/user-91321999

But continuity and relevance are certainly an issue with this set and any suggestions would certainly be appreciated. The score for the third piece is currently in tatters but I'm working on it.

As far as Reaper goes FWIW, you could try opening multiple projects in separate tabs. With a project open go to File > Open project and then in the Open Project window check the box at the bottom that says 'Open in new project tab.'  You should be able to easily copy and paste back and forth between the tabs but I don't know what this will do to your available memory if the projects are large.



Dane Aubrun said:

Ingo, going along with the continuity idea it might be worth thinking what the next piece will be (assuming there is one) before doing anything with the ending of this piece.

Can I ask if you've wondered how many pieces the set will comprise?

Oh, and I really do feel your pain about Split and Glue, Cut and Paste. I find I end up with quite a few saved "versions" in case I want to revert or copy from some previous version. (With Reaper copy from one version to another really is pain. Maybe there's an easy way that I've yet to discover but until I do, it's an Aspirin job!)

Dane, here are scores for the other two pieces, thanks again for your help.

Chamber%20group%20No%201.pdf

Chamber%20group%20No%203.pdf

Hi Ingo. This rests on the ears in a soulful way. I would have liked that motif in the piccolo in bar 3 to be employed more - here and there, with other instruments, and pitch registers.. It is striking and contrasting - in it's intervallic pitch relation and rhythm, and think it could be quite effective.  For me, the celeste solo is out of place for various reasons.  I think it should have been used here and there earlier in the piece if there was to be a solo later..  and with the solo at about a minute, (which I find a bit too long in proportion) with a somewhat different approach to harmony and rhythm, and then, without returning somewhat to reference any material before the solo... it didnt make sense to me.. 

Thanks for posting. I enjoyed listening.

Thank you Gregorio for listening and commenting. That's interesting that you liked the opening piccolo part, I hadn't considered developing it, I thought of it more as 'bird call' that kind of book ends the bell note at the end but it would have been interesting to make better use of it, you make a good point.

I agree that the celesta solo is a non sequitur as currently used and others have pointed that out as well. I originally intended to blend it into the closing measures with more accompaniment but I was unable to make that work. Since it plays an important contrasting  role in the first movement of this work I felt I needed to have it play a similar role in this middle movement as well. I'll have to reconsider that! Thanks again for the advice.

gregorio X said:

Hi Ingo. This rests on the ears in a soulful way. I would have liked that motif in the piccolo in bar 3 to be employed more - here and there, with other instruments, and pitch registers.. It is striking and contrasting - in it's intervallic pitch relation and rhythm, and think it could be quite effective.  For me, the celeste solo is out of place for various reasons.  I think it should have been used here and there earlier in the piece if there was to be a solo later..  and with the solo at about a minute, (which I find a bit too long in proportion) with a somewhat different approach to harmony and rhythm, and then, without returning somewhat to reference any material before the solo... it didnt make sense to me.. 

Thanks for posting. I enjoyed listening.

Hello Ingo,

Aw, I'm no help but flattered you should ask for my comment.

I'm having a look at the 3rd part score and have to say it's pretty impressive. I haven't looked at it all in detail yet but so far, it's translucent - a thin texture but swift and with a detailed interplay of parts. I tried a few bars at the piano.  It has a vaguely martial quality at the outset even if quiet, as if coming up out of the mist.

The mood (possibly because of the way you constructed the melody) continues on but a bit more veiled. And then onto calmer moments aside from the flourish in bar 17 - probably best to mark the trumpet p or pp so both flute and picc sound out. I can see where it's leading - up to the more florid bar 24. I presume those double lines above the staves in bar 25 mean you can have a swift dram of something to keep you going!

Some interesting doubling, the cello G# in bar 15 with the horn.

I'll have a further look.

I assumed you meant the opening to be around p or mf in dynamic; and that nothing is transposed except the piccolo down and the Dbl Bass up.

I did notice a couple of things so far - possibly exactly as you want them - but if not:- the last bassoon note in bar 6 precedes the last beat by 1/16. (From my pianistic try it sounds good as it is.) In bar 5 the bassoon plays an E# when it plays F's otherwise. (I do love accidentals - my Bluff Your Way defines an accidental as "a wrong note played on purpose")

I was expecting the celeste to play a more prominent role than just leading the end out if only to balance it with parts 1 and 2 where it has more elaborate solo passages. But that's just me!

Anyway, I'll leave it there for the moment. And looking forward to the rendering.

Cheers for now.

Ingo Lee said:

Dane, here are scores for the other two pieces, thanks again for your help.

Chamber%20group%20No%201.pdf

Chamber%20group%20No%203.pdf

Thank you Dane for looking at all of that and making excellent comments. I think you are right about each of these points, yes I do have some "accidents", and I need to have some dynamics for the opening certainly.  And yes it's that darned celesta again. I'm hoping that after his extended solo in movement 2 he'll be happy to sit quietly and then wrap things up here :)   It just didn't seem to fit in any of this hyper activity, I think getting it to blend effectively with the close of movement 2 is still a big issue. I'll have to revisit this work as a whole and see what jumps out.

Dane Aubrun said:

Hello Ingo,

Aw, I'm no help but flattered you should ask for my comment.

I'm having a look at the 3rd part score and have to say it's pretty impressive. I haven't looked at it all in detail yet but so far, it's translucent - a thin texture but swift and with a detailed interplay of parts. I tried a few bars at the piano.  It has a vaguely martial quality at the outset even if quiet, as if coming up out of the mist.

The mood (possibly because of the way you constructed the melody) continues on but a bit more veiled. And then onto calmer moments aside from the flourish in bar 17 - probably best to mark the trumpet p or pp so both flute and picc sound out. I can see where it's leading - up to the more florid bar 24. I presume those double lines above the staves in bar 25 mean you can have a swift dram of something to keep you going!

Some interesting doubling, the cello G# in bar 15 with the horn.

I'll have a further look.

I assumed you meant the opening to be around p or mf in dynamic; and that nothing is transposed except the piccolo down and the Dbl Bass up.

I did notice a couple of things so far - possibly exactly as you want them - but if not:- the last bassoon note in bar 6 precedes the last beat by 1/16. (From my pianistic try it sounds good as it is.) In bar 5 the bassoon plays an E# when it plays F's otherwise. (I do love accidentals - my Bluff Your Way defines an accidental as "a wrong note played on purpose")

I was expecting the celeste to play a more prominent role than just leading the end out if only to balance it with parts 1 and 2 where it has more elaborate solo passages. But that's just me!

Anyway, I'll leave it there for the moment. And looking forward to the rendering.

Cheers for now.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Sign up info

Read before you sign up to find out what the requirements are!

Store

© 2020   Created by Gav Brown.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service