| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Greenhorn
Full Member
USA
21 Posts |
 Posted - 04 March 2010 : 6:56:59 PM
|
I've been working on this piece for about a decade now. It's pretty much finished, but I have no idea when I'll ever actually finish it, since I'm never quite satisfied. The score is mostly finished, though there are some parts that are different from the sound file since it has been a while since I've updated it.
This piece is a symphonic poem, basically telling the story of a person's journey from depressed, angry and afraid of the future, to finding meaning and goodness in life - basically finding God. My working title is "Reborn." It is written more or less in the late Romantic period style.
The entire piece is based off of the musical ideas introduced in the first 30 seconds or so. Some larger sections and melodies come back later in hidden or altered form. As a few of many examples, at 2:42, the flutes and oboes play a slower version of the melody in the first two bars of the piece with a slightly altered rhythm, 4:47 to 6:31 is simply a variation of the beginning to 1:43 to 2:43, and 2:39 to 3:38 is a variation of the beginning to 0:20. Certain tiny bits of melody and rhythm - two note motifs, three-note motifs, etc. - also reappear throughout the enitre piece. All of them are extracted from the first couple bars. It's similar to, for example, Beethoven's 5th symphony, all four movements of which are based around the "da da da dum" motif.
The piece begins in C minor, and around the middle it modulates to the dominant of the relative major of C minor, Bb major. It briefly goes to D major, C minor, Gb major, and finally ends on C major (a nice little tritone modulation.)
I would appreciate any serious musical critiques, or even just general comments about how the music flows as a whole, opinions on the orchestration, or anything at all. Mainly I'd like to know about anything that you feel could be improved, no matter how small. It's hard to critique my own music, so while I think it's pretty good, I really don't know.
For some reason I can't upload the sound file, so here's a link:
http://www.musicnotationservices.com/Reborn.mp3
File Attachment: Reborn.mus (387.37 KB)
Uploaded on 5/8/2010 11:47:01 PM
Downloaded 9 time(s).
Category:Scores
Description:
Reborn - symphonic poem
| |
|
|
whack47
Bronze Member
USA
54 Posts |
Posted - 05 March 2010 : 12:46:48 AM
|
Really nice. It flows well. It doesn't sound like you were going for a huge ending, but even for a quiet ending it seems weak. I hear V-I and it ends.
The score looks nice. The percussion is nicely arranged. nice... |
 |
|
|
qccowboy
Platinum Member
Canada
1842 Posts |
Posted - 05 March 2010 : 06:02:44 AM
|
The score looks fine, and there don't seem to be any blatant orchestrational errors.
Musically, it feels unfocused. I too often get the impression that the harmony arrives at each point through your forcing it there. I don't get a sense that it flows freely where it is supposed to go. Often times, you have a lot of melodic material that is outright battling against the harmony around it. The same goes for some of the counterpoint.
There are some GREAT climax moments in the piece, but what leads to and from those moments isn't as well thought-out.
The opening motif, to my ear, is a tiny bit too "Mahler" for my taste (it's very close to one of the main themes of the "Resurrection" symphony).
|
"Writing music to be revolutionary is like cooking to be famous: Music’s main function is not revolution. – Alan Belkin "
"String Quartet: noun. a good violinist, a bad violinist, an ex-violinist, and someone who hates violinists, getting together to complain about composers."
Michel R. Edward
compositeur
Crabtree, Québec
www.dosblanc.ca |
|
|
|
Greenhorn
Full Member
USA
21 Posts |
Posted - 05 March 2010 : 06:40:10 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by qccowboy
The score looks fine, and there don't seem to be any blatant orchestrational errors.
Musically, it feels unfocused. I too often get the impression that the harmony arrives at each point through your forcing it there. I don't get a sense that it flows freely where it is supposed to go. Often times, you have a lot of melodic material that is outright battling against the harmony around it. The same goes for some of the counterpoint.
Can you give some specific parts, and/or some parts that aren't like that to your ear compared to parts that are, etc.?
quote:
There are some GREAT climax moments in the piece, but what leads to and from those moments isn't as well thought-out.
Again, is this just in general, or do you have some specific parts that stand out, and can you go into more detail?
quote:
The opening motif, to my ear, is a tiny bit too "Mahler" for my taste (it's very close to one of the main themes of the "Resurrection" symphony).
I'm actually not very familiar with Mahler, so if it sounds like him, it was accidental. I mostly listen to Brahms, Tschaikovski, Saint-Saens, Debussy, Stravinski, Rimski-Korsakov, Dvorak, Berlioz, Lizst, etc. I'm not even a big listener of Wagner. |
Edited by - Greenhorn on 06 March 2010 12:23:14 PM |
|
|
|
Greenhorn
Full Member
USA
21 Posts |
Posted - 05 March 2010 : 06:44:08 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by whack47
Really nice. It flows well. It doesn't sound like you were going for a huge ending, but even for a quiet ending it seems weak. I hear V-I and it ends.
The score looks nice. The percussion is nicely arranged. nice...
I absolutely agree. The part that I am by far the least happy about is the ending. Right now it's basically just a stand-in while I figure out a better ending.
Thanks for your other comments. |
|
|
|
qccowboy
Platinum Member
Canada
1842 Posts |
Posted - 05 March 2010 : 07:50:53 AM
|
I will comment JUST going from the string parts.
for example, measure 5, what the 2nd violins and violas play doesn't seem to be in the same harmony as the 1st violins and celli/basses. (this is a minor example, there are some larger ones later on)
Why do the 1st violins only come in at measure 5? is there an actual justifiable reason for it?
The 2nd violins cross over the 1st violins, but there is no particular effect rendered by doing so, it feels "mushy" and imprecise.
(BTW, did you change the shape of the tie at measure 8, in the 1st violins? that is one ugly tie! it looks more like a slur. Notationally, that measure's stems are in the wrong direction)
I'd recommend AGAINST using "non-divisi" at measure 12. it is highly doubtful any orchestra would perform it that way anyway.
What is the harmony in measure 21-22?
It doesn't seem to make any logical sense. The music is, until this point, very triadic. The sudden appearance of these dissonances that are neither prepared nor resolved is confusing.
measure 23-24, what's going on there? why are the bass and cello a 6th apart? it's murky and far too bottom heavy. particularly for the way your strings are spaced out.
again, 2 before B, there's those close-spaced celli and basses. generally not good orchestration practice.
at 1 before B, there's a very sudden harmonic shift in the middle of a rapid downward passage, but it just doesn't have any effect because the target harmony has already been stated. The sudden shift for a few notes of a triplet end up sounding like wrong notes.
I'll just stop there.
You are trying to micro-manage the harmony in a manner that just doesn't suit the medium.
There are far too many changes of harmony on off-beats, that return to previous harmony, with no real effect.
I'm being hard on you. I know.
But this is a LOT of work, and you obviously have the passion and the musical ear. You require more craft to put it all to good use, now.
You need to clearly delineate the harmonic movement. EVEN when you want to blur the harmonic direction, the underlying direction should be clear.
Here the problem I'm finding is that there is lots of blur, but what lies beneath it doesn't hold together as "direction".
let me give you one more example of "micromanagement" that is working against the piece: 1st and 2nd violins, measure 38-39.
there are 3rds, and a bunch of 2nds mixed in here and there between them that will sound like "wrong notes".
(again, why are the 1st violins below the 2nd? there is no apparent reason for it here)
|
"Writing music to be revolutionary is like cooking to be famous: Music’s main function is not revolution. – Alan Belkin "
"String Quartet: noun. a good violinist, a bad violinist, an ex-violinist, and someone who hates violinists, getting together to complain about composers."
Michel R. Edward
compositeur
Crabtree, Québec
www.dosblanc.ca |
|
|
|
Greenhorn
Full Member
USA
21 Posts |
Posted - 05 March 2010 : 08:42:37 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by qccowboy
[snip]
That's some good detailed analysis, which is what I need. Thanks, I will definitely look into it, and keep those points in mind when I look at the rest of the score.
How about the general flow of the piece, not taking into account the type of things you explained in your last post? Is the flow of the piece coherent from beginning to end, are there parts that seem to lead somewhere and don't but should, etc.?
Here are a few comments on some of your comments.
quote:
Why do the 1st violins only come in at measure 5? is there an actual justifiable reason for it?
I wanted a contrast in tone color at the beginning, so I had the violas and violins play together. I suppose it would make sense to have the 1st violins play the violin part instead of the 2nd violins.
quote:
(BTW, did you change the shape of the tie at measure 8, in the 1st violins? that is one ugly tie! it looks more like a slur. Notationally, that measure's stems are in the wrong direction)
Good catch on the stem direction. I don't know how I missed it. The tie is too tall, also. I'll change that.
quote:
I'd recommend AGAINST using "non-divisi" at measure 12. it is highly doubtful any orchestra would perform it that way anyway.
Very good point.
quote:
What is the harmony in measure 21-22?
It doesn't seem to make any logical sense. The music is, until this point, very triadic. The sudden appearance of these dissonances that are neither prepared nor resolved is confusing.
I kind of wanted a mixture of tonalities, but you're right, it needs to be clarified.
quote:
measure 23-24, what's going on there? why are the bass and cello a 6th apart? it's murky and far too bottom heavy. particularly for the way your strings are spaced out.
again, 2 before B, there's those close-spaced celli and basses. generally not good orchestration practice.
Another good point.
quote:
at 1 before B, there's a very sudden harmonic shift in the middle of a rapid downward passage, but it just doesn't have any effect because the target harmony has already been stated.
EDIT: I think I know what you mean now. Do you mean the Dm7 chord that is interrupted at the very end of 2 before B, and then goes back to a Dm7 in the next measure? You're right, that does need to be fixed. |
Edited by - Greenhorn on 07 March 2010 7:35:45 PM |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Reborn - full-orchestra symphonic poem
