|
Post by king2b on Nov 24, 2017 15:23:51 GMT
Nothing epic here. Originally written for harp and small orchestra but I am thinking of orchestrating the harp to to be played within the orchestra as I cannot find a harpist! (Can anyone?!) Sorry if there is any balance problems, I am thinking of getting VSL in December when the offers come out. A Distant Memory - Full Score.pdf (132.64 KB) A Distant Memory
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Nov 24, 2017 17:18:57 GMT
Hi Kevin, There are some really nice moments here. I definitely think you could have a pianist play the harp part. Not only is the part idiomatically written for piano, but I also think piano is quite appropriate for this style and you might actually have real-life balance issues with a harp against the full orchestra. Harmonically, I thought it all flowed well, but I was not convinced the modulation in measure 48. The Edom7 seems to come out of nowhere and I found it jarring. The measures preceding it are a series of ascending stepwise progressions. Just a suggestion here, but if you continued the ascending baseline all the way to arrive at the A at measure 49, I think the modulation would flow much more naturally into the next section. Something like: And if you are in the market for an orchestral library upgrade, you should definitely consider East West Orchestra. They are having a Black Friday sale, so you can get the Silver edition right now for $129. www.soundsonline.com/symphonic-orchestra
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Nov 25, 2017 15:08:42 GMT
Hi Kev.
John might have a point about those harp semis at letter D against the forte of the orchestra. On the assumption you want them heard, they might cut through a bit better if you doubled them up at the octave (with the harp right hand I mean) and/or perhaps mark down the brass (trpt and bone) to mf. I agree with John that the dominant into A major at b48 is not convincing, but it may be helped if you voice lead the clarinet part into b49. Perhaps a minim b on b3 of b48 and an E below at b49 that fades out (decrescendos) over a full bar and a beat. Something like that anyway to smooth out the join. Perhaps even add a touch for the 2nd clt too!
|
|
|
Post by king2b on Nov 26, 2017 10:59:21 GMT
Many thanks for the comments I will look into them tomorrow on my return to work.
|
|
|
Post by king2b on Nov 26, 2017 11:02:59 GMT
And if you are in the market for an orchestral library upgrade, you should definitely consider East West Orchestra. They are having a Black Friday sale, so you can get the Silver edition right now for $129. www.soundsonline.com/symphonic-orchestraI have the silver version. I just could not get on with it. Looking at VSL as it seems to be relatively easy to get it to work with Sibelius. Then it probably is me!
|
|
|
Post by driscollmusick on Nov 26, 2017 19:52:53 GMT
Hmm... Well, I haven't worked with VSL and I don't use Sibelius, but the East West libraries are a bit of a CPU hog, so I imagine they will not run well within Sibelius (might be an issue for VSL, too?).
When I first started using modern instrument libraries, I realized that hosting them in Finale was not going to cut it. So I got a DAW (Cubase). However, unlike most folks, I still do control my MIDI playback using Finale. I have both programs running at the same time, connected to each other via virtual MIDI cables (LoopBe30). Cubase sits there hosting my template, waiting for Finale to send it live MIDI data for playback. This is the only solution I'm aware of that lets me always work with standard notation AND have robust sample playback.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Nov 27, 2017 1:00:45 GMT
Kevin,
I really like this. I do have a question for everyone and a comment. No matter how I listen to this, headphones or speakers, it seems distorted and muddy. Is that just me? I find that I run the main and virtual instrument faders at 0.0 in the mixer for best results. Maybe it's too much reverb.
I think that folks are having trouble with measure 48 because of the first chord in the measure. Let's take the first statement of the melody. I love this melody, especially the very strong progression in measure 15. Wonderful. I've heard it before, but who cares. It's great here. Then the first beat of measure 16 happens. What on earth is that. Whatever it is, it's the same in measure 48. I think the second half of 48 would work if the first half wasn't such a let down. But it's just one measure.
|
|
|
Post by lawrence on Nov 29, 2017 1:21:26 GMT
Kevin, Overall very nice. I didn't read all the replies so this may be repeat. What bothered me were the frequent resolutions which seemed contrived. At m.24 the melody could go up to B instead of G which would be an incomplete resolution and indicates there is more to come. At m. 39 the last chord is D7 which resolves to G, but you go to D maj. which feels odd. Measure 56 is the strangest partly because there is sudden parallel motion from E to A. A better choice would be to stay on E maj. in m. 56 which will make the final resolution more climactic which comes only 4 bars later. Good work.
|
|
|
Post by king2b on Nov 29, 2017 14:21:02 GMT
Thanks for all your comments. I am going to do a bit of revision over the next few weeks and post a new score. I think I need to get stuck into this one a bit more. It only took a week or so to write in sporadic moments!
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Nov 29, 2017 15:20:33 GMT
Nothing wrong with something that came to you quickly. It depends on what you plan to do with this. I think only a bunch of composers would point out the things that they did. Would you have written it much differently if you'd taken three months? I like that it is spontaneous. Sometimes we fiddle too much with things and they aren't as fresh. But then, I write for the fun of it. Good therapy.
|
|
|
Post by king2b on Nov 29, 2017 15:22:40 GMT
I can see that there could be a bit more to this piece than the first stab. I am a bit of a three minute composer at times and lack the knowledge of developing themes etc.
|
|
|
Post by king2b on Dec 1, 2017 13:43:21 GMT
|
|