|
Post by Mike Hewer on Jan 24, 2019 10:04:26 GMT
I agree with John, it is developing very nicely. Hopefully you will start moving into new fields of modality, and tonality as you develop your motifs as it started to feel a little stuck harmonically towards the end for me. Having said that, your scoring and compositional invention is really great and despite what I've just said, I thought it was terrific, full of the rigour that paves the way for seriously powerful emotional impact. Can I see and hear a touch of Bernstein's 'Jeremiah' in the scoring ? Forget this being an exercise, this has the makings of a symphony imv. Don't forget to break your own rules if your proclivities lean towards something outside of your self-imposed parameter box. It is in those (inspired) moments - the ones you can't resist despite your own rules - that you find your own self and even more originality as new paths unfold. Twist, turn, upend, transpose, stretch intervals, create Hanson-esque sonorities, use enharmonic practice to move to other areas of tonality/modality, try a bitonal approach to the 5 notes to create more material, motifs, harmony - jeeez I could go on, but you probably are doing similar things anyways.
Apply your imagination to all these and more techniques for in doing so, again, you are finding yourself. Can't wait for the next instalment.
EDIT.. I'd mark and confirm sul G for the violins at b8-12. Marking it thus will then include the higher a flat and g and avoid any doubt. This will naturally add some timbral intensity to the line even in pp, which would enhance the expression imv.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Jan 25, 2019 15:57:26 GMT
Thanks for all the input so far. It truly is appreciated.
I've posted the next part in the OP, version 3. This has some changes as suggested as well as additional material. The last statement is an inversion of the melodic content, and from here I'm aiming to start developing the harmonic vocabulary. Still playing around with how to do it, but that's the fun part.
John, is this a better handling of the pedal C?
Mike, thanks for the "sul G" idea. I'm working on bowings, but not being a string player, things like this don't occur to me. Hopefully, when all is said and done, I didn't wait to long to start shifting the harmonic structure. Oh well, that's what rewrites are for.
Thanks again all.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Feb 6, 2019 16:19:04 GMT
Tim, it's just great (v3). This really is a symphony, it has all the hallmarks - a powerful 1st subject, a contrasting section and development. Keep the revisions coming and how about some percussive hits on the syncopation here and there?
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Feb 11, 2019 13:55:13 GMT
Thanks for the encouragement, Mike. I'm feeling pretty good with it so far. Hit a bit of a black hole on the next section as far as getting what I want, but I'm figuring it out.
Percussion is on the way. I'd already thought where I want it, just not sure what instruments to use. So many choices...
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Feb 11, 2019 14:35:04 GMT
Tim, do you know the Holst Japanese suite? I posted it a while back. It also begins with solo bassoon, like your piece, and makes good use of the pentatonic scale. I think that was my first reaction too, even though listening again they're quite dissimilar. Quite a thing to immediately evoke Holst without aping him, in my book, but that's Tim for you.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Feb 12, 2019 9:13:53 GMT
Thanks for the encouragement, Mike. I'm feeling pretty good with it so far. Hit a bit of a black hole on the next section as far as getting what I want, but I'm figuring it out. Percussion is on the way. I'd already thought where I want it, just not sure what instruments to use. So many choices... For Christ's sake (literally) don't knock on Heaven's door.
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Feb 15, 2019 23:04:36 GMT
I'm late to this party, but ... I must say, I'm blown away by the possibilities of just 5 notes! Who would have thought one could weave such drama and texture from just 5 notes, in an age where everyone is scrambling for all 12, and I myself am reaching for 19. Very inspiring indeed. Looking forward to hear the finished version!
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Feb 17, 2019 20:11:41 GMT
OK, Mike, I'll take it out!
Thanks HS. I found that when I truly limited my choices to just 5 notes, the amount of material available to work with was staggering, once I dug into it.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Feb 17, 2019 20:45:01 GMT
OK, Mike, I'll take it out! Thanks HS. I found that when I truly limited my choices to just 5 notes, the amount of material available to work with was staggering, once I dug into it. Did you restrict yourself in terms of melody and themes, or to harmony as well? Is the entire piece just five notes across octaves?
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Feb 17, 2019 21:00:08 GMT
Both melody and harmony. The first section was built with C D Eb G Ab. Those are the only notes used until measure 18. At 18 I introduce the new "mode" which consists of C Db F G Ab and again all notes used come from this scale. That's the process I used. So I may change the scale, but every note is one of the five in the scale.
The next section I'm planning to expand the harmonic choices, but I'm keeping the melody pentatonic but using a more "western" version. We'll see....
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Feb 24, 2019 21:04:36 GMT
Thanks to all for all the input.
I've added the next step in the original post (pentatonic 4).
I look forward to your response!
Thanks again!!!
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Feb 25, 2019 18:20:27 GMT
Thanks to all for all the input. I've added the next step in the original post (pentatonic 4). I look forward to your response! Thanks again!!! Sounding excellent even through NS so a live performance would probably be rousing indeed. It's hard to detach the mood, which often veers into what I think of as arabic/egyptian tonalities, from the kind of films set in such places - some moments sound like Miklos Rozsa from a 60s sword'n'sandals epic. That's a good thing. Great balance as well, everyone has time to breath and so the piece breathes too. That said, I think you would need some rests or dovetailing b147-156 for flutes, oboes and clarinets to be safe. I'm not too good with spotting range issues off the top of my head, but the trombones seem to go very high at points - b147-156 again, into horn range really. Anything around B and above I treat very cautiously. b69, there's no a2 or 1/2 marking on the top trumpets. We're getting into nitpicks here! and I assume you just forgot that one, as you mark it elsewhere. Query re some of your notation - b20 onwards, 1st violins and then 2nd & violas a little later. That's to achieve a staccato that's "pushed" just a bit longer but isn't the full note duration? If there's precedent for it then good to know, but it seems like a paradox to me. By all means correct me And brass at b16-17, what's the purpose of the broken tie? Also in b16-17 trumpets, I would staccato the triplets too - in my experience at least, at that tempo they won't be played live with the crispness I imagine you want. Having said, some of this might be workarounds to make Sibelius playback as you want and you wouldn't use in a live score? Very, very good stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Feb 26, 2019 14:49:44 GMT
Thanks Dave.
I'll look into dovetailing. Good idea! Need to maybe rewrite a bit so I can keep the density.
T-bones go to a high B, shouldn't be a problem at the dynamic level and they are also doubled. Should be plenty of support for the players.
I missed a few other a2's, etc. Once the piece is finished, I'll go through and do a thorough edit of the score as well as combine the percussion lines down to 2-3 lines/players.
re b20, it's a mezzo-staccato and your interpretation is correct. The mark is more common in string writing, but does appear in other instrument works.
The broken tie is a scoop, (more common in jazz). I used it for the "rip" effect in the NS since it gives a fairly accurate representation of what I'm looking for. In the final score it will be replaced by an actual rip notation.
Staccato dots added.
Thanks again.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Dexter on Feb 26, 2019 15:52:35 GMT
Ah, then I've been a little too cautious with my bones writing as I still am with any high brass range. Checking my reference material again, high B does seem fine. Knowledge acquired! I might be also too cautious with the woodwinds but I'm sure they'd have to insert at least one or two breaths in, so you may as well make it official. You could probably do it without dovetailing to keep the density if your rests are staggered. As a rough idea: You would never notice the missing notes live, I'm sure. Although this was done without any consideration for the music itself. Or; flutes will have the easiest time so you could possibly leave them mainly unchanged, and dovetail oboes and clarinets instead. Support with celesta, glockenspiel or harp, etc etc. This is how I've tended to orchestrate similar passages - playing absolutely safe though I could probably have doubled the duration of each player's passage. It's oboes I get paranoid about. Of course this is based on my relatively limited real-world experience :/
|
|
|
Post by gx on Feb 26, 2019 17:53:04 GMT
Hey, Tim, this is wonderful! I think the dramatic arc is very effective, and the shifts in intensity - beautifully timed. Very colorful and enjoyable, and to my ear, worked perfectly. Are you using Sibelius w note performer?
ps, using the 'cell' as a basis for manipulation offers a great cohesiveness - (very akin to my approach).. It offers so much in the way of possibilities.
|
|