Hi there everyone.

First, let me introduce myself. I am Erwin, a Dutchman, and shortly I have desided to start writing out the tunes stuck in my head. It has gone a little bit further then that, and I do have a few questions about duration and some tricks. Don't know if I am in the right area for that...

I am a newbie here, and I am a rookie in writing. Although I have asked some people in my direct surroundings to listen, they cannot help me out there were I got stuck, so here are my few questions. If it is placed wrongly, please move it to the right area, feel free... :)

Gonna ask anyway...

The first question may sound strange, but here it is. I am currently writing a concerto for Choir SATB, flute, oboe, horn (g), violins 1+2, violoncellos and contrabasses and the duration of the whole 15-piece concerto will be around a full hour. How's that, too short?

Question number two is in the same cathegory. I also am working on a piece (andante, allego, allegretto, adagio) for an alto clarinet (with strings). Since my fantasy for that piece is not over yet... :P ... how long may such a concerto take, I suppose 15 minutes for four pieces is a little short, right?

Last question: how do I (preferably with strings) imitate rain?

Well, hope you can help me out. Will post more later... ;)

Thanks in advance for helping me.

Kind regards,

Erwin

You need to be a member of Composers' Forum to add comments!

Join Composers' Forum

Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • I heard some slight changes from before, but I didn't hear any modulations? Which bars did you change?

  • For some reason, I accidently uploaded the same files as there were before. How did I do that...

    Bob, that part I didn't change so I can answer you that...

    M.5 in the first violins, the C. First let me tell you that this pt7 is part of a 14-piece music-piece. The violins are playing the second theme there of the whole piece ("and it was good"), where the horn is playing the main theme of "The Creation of All". I understand it distracts you, can you explain to me, please, how it does that? I did it on two purposes, first to create harmony with the other instruments (other strings and the horn) and second because the second theme is just this 4 notes, repeated. Sometimes, as you see in the third set of notes, the third and fourth note are the same (to add some variation).

    What would you suggest in that matter, if I may ask?

    M.15 then. I see what you mean. Going to solve that one. Thanks.

    So... going to upload the right files, feeling so stupid...

  • He're the new files. I checked them, they are really the correct ones...

    07 - Intermezzo.pdf

    07 - Intermezzo.mp3

  • I would suggest a crash course in counter-point. That would totally fix the redundant harmony issue.

  • Specially for Rodney Carlyle Money, here´s part 14...

    14 - Laus Deo.pdf

    14 - Laus Deo.mp3

    https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/8608248679?profile=original
  • I like #14 more than #7, even though I generally prefer instrumental music. :-)  I think #14 has a better dramatic arch than #7.

    I was going to mock up my own version of a few bars from #7, just to show how I would have done it, but after hearing #14, I realized that I have been listening to #7 in isolation, out of context. I will have to think about how it fits into the rest of the movements in order to have a better idea of how it "ought" to sound.

  • When it comes to it, I will place the whole 14 parts...

  • So you want to know how long would be "too long."  Funny, because two people with your exact name asked this question two times before.

     

    I would like to suggest that Darius Milhaud's seven-month operas are too long (but in duration, only) and  Mahler's minuscule partitas {for solo uranium-238 nuclear-powered trombone} are all much too short.   One of them is 0.0006 nanoseconds long, which is why hardly anyone ever catches a single note of it.

     

    In any case, your piece should be between the length of one planckthstrom in width, and the distance from here to the edge of furthest quasar, in breadth, from top to side. 

     

    The idea that

     

    "Wagner wrote some hellishly long operas (some at 5 hours) that only a music composer could rejoice in, but you will never hear those operas performed unless you go to New York or Vienna"

     

    is questionable.

     

    I have to say, with a totally straight face, and without any exaggeration whatsoever, that I once saw a Wagner opera performed in Munich.   (It was not performed in New York or Vienna, so the idea that you would NEVER see a Wagner opera—even a hellishly short one— performed elsewhere, in any other city, seems disproven, just as the claim that Pluto was NEVER a planet was disproven during the last century, although that celestial object is not so categorized now).  This is a pretty bad analogy, I realize.

     

    Did I ever say, "I felt I didn't want to write more as it felt totally complete to me (despite having set out to write a large ternary form piece)?"  

     

    I think someone was putting words into my mouth, when S.L reported that I said that.

     

    "But we must have our little jokes, now and again."

    --Maximilien François Marie Isidore de Robespierre

     

     

    But we'll get to that later, in paragraph six hundred twelve, volume XLVXXVIII.

     

    Earlier, in this thread, we heard mention of the "principals of electricity," but that is not right, since we should say, "the principles of electricity," (not to make unnecessary distinctions) and we must also say, the "theory of evolution," since it's only a hypothesis, right?  (Except the part about homo sapiens being descended from scorpions, frogs and lower mammals, and the part about Cro-Magnon Man being descended from the authors of the first Bible, which was carved in stone that was deposited in an antediluvian geological layer, near the bones of Noah and the wreck of the Hindenburg.  That's what my high school principle told me).

     

    I don't mean to be pitt-nicky, but I have to agree with Fredrick when he talks about the order of listing instruments on a score.   I just get so much pleasure from seeing the clarinet BENEATH the piccolo and ABOVE the bassoon.   I don't know why exactly.  Even Stravinsky did it that way in his score for Le Sacre du Printemps (which means, "The Fireouchka of Oedipus' Nightingale, in certain Chinese dialects of Russo-Ukrainian), and which sets the standard for all musical judgments for all time (until someone writes something better). 

     

    About the "lack of violas."  There is always a very valid reason for a lack of violas in any musical composition written during the 21st century, or at least for compositions written around here, on Logic, Sibelius, or Cubabase.  The main reason is that the computer composition programs do not synthesize the viola in any way that is convincing, or as believable as the synthesis of violins, cellos or even the double bass.  I don’t know why that is.  Perhaps someone could offer a possible explanation.  Violins have greatly improved over the last four years or so.  But the violas just don't sound right.  (So leave the violas out.  I always do, too.  Almost always.)

     

     

     

    I like the idea of 14 parts or more for a piece of music, and I appreciate the analogy with Mussorgsky's Pictures, the notion of many short parts (about 3 minutes or so long) all strung together, to create a large work of symphonic proportions.

     

    On the other hand, I also like Allan Pettersson's fully realized and successful efforts to write symphonies over one hour long that have NO BREAKS whatsoever, or even the hint that there are separate movements.   People don't call him the Swedish Mahler for nothing. (In fact, I get paid a nickel every time I call  Pettersson "The Swedish Mahler").

     

    "I would suggest a crash course in counter-point. "

     

    There is no such thing.  What would Schoenberg, Hindemith or Aldous Huxley say about such a suggestion?  [Note:  Aldous Huxley was the author of the novel "Point Counterpoint," which argues (convincingly) that the third movement—Heiliger  Dankgesang—of  Beethoven's String Quartet No. 15, op. 132 conclusively PROVES THE EXISTENCE OF GOD, beyond any reasonable doubt.]

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gxmhpaq6I4E

    Beethoven, op. 132, 3rd mvt., Heiliger Dankgesang, string quartet (bar-graph score)

  • Ok, something quite different. It is far from finished, needs polishing, too... Esp. the violas I need to have a close look at, but here it is, HS... ;)

    3 - Andante.pdf

    3 - Andante.mp3

    https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/8608249879?profile=original
This reply was deleted.