|
|
Post by gx on Jun 9, 2018 22:04:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jun 11, 2018 23:03:38 GMT
gx,
Thanks for posting this. I confess that, like piano, string quartet is not among my favorites. That said, I found this strangely relaxing. I was having a little trouble separating voices. Did you pan 2 voices hard left and the other 2 hard right?
|
|
|
|
Post by gx on Jun 12, 2018 5:06:48 GMT
Thanks for listening, Bob. I can see what you mean by 'strangely relaxing', though i hadn't thought of it that way.
Someone else had commented as well about the panning.. Curious to me, bc - I put them at about 10, 11, 1, and 2 o'clock.. But the suggestion was to move them closer 'in'.
Thank you for commenting!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jun 12, 2018 12:27:26 GMT
Not that it's that important, but you might play around with spreading out the 10 and 2 more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim Marko on Jun 17, 2018 19:05:05 GMT
Gregorio,
This is quite impressive. I enjoyed the harmonic language you used throughout.
Any chance for a score? I would love to see it.
Looking forward to the next movement.
|
|
|
|
Post by gx on Jun 17, 2018 20:06:59 GMT
Thanks so much Tim! I must be off now, but will post a score later. I'm glad you liked the harmonic language!
|
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Jun 19, 2018 19:20:47 GMT
Finally got around to this. My first thought was, if this is the 2nd mvmt, where's the first?? My second thought was, the instruments sounded a bit too "dry" -- perhaps add a bit of reverb to make them more "comfortable" to listen to? Just a thought from someone admittedly inexperienced in audio processing.
Third thought was, wow, this was quite different from what I was expecting. I'll have to give it a few more listens before I comment more.
|
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Jun 19, 2018 19:31:53 GMT
P.S. After listening to this several times, I still feel I haven't quite penetrated it yet... but beginning to appreciate the bouncy / lively passage around 3-4 mins in. Listening to it again a few more times to see if I can figure out what it's all about.  |
|
|
|
Post by gx on Jun 19, 2018 19:34:55 GMT
Hey HS!!
Thanks for listening!!
I posted another version w some rev. and re-panned -
Also, i posted the 1st mov. as well.
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
Post by fuguestate on Jun 19, 2018 19:55:23 GMT
Listening to the new version now... 1:10: very powerful cluster(?)-chord there. 1:40: liked the little dialogue between instruments here. circa 3:30: liked the way you spaced the voices, gives interest to the texture on top of the bouncy interplay between the instruments. After listening to this many times and becoming more familiar with it, I found the ending quite, for lack of a better word, appropriate. A fitting closure to what came before. I found the harmonic language quite foreign to my ears, like some faraway, foreign inhospitable landscape. I think it will take me a while longer to get used to it. P.S. I couldn't find the 1st mvmt on your soundcloud? |
|
|
|
Post by gx on Jun 19, 2018 23:35:14 GMT
HS, I really appreciate you delving into this! (so many listenings!) There are a few cells introduced in the first 30 seconds (which morph) that you can follow through through harmonic language - (if the harmony seems distant).
The main one - f, f#, d#, e, c# b#.
The links should work now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jun 20, 2018 0:07:42 GMT
About reverb from someone who probably shouldn't say anything. I suppose we need it to enhance computer recordings. It can do that, but it can also hide a multitude of sins. I have listened to many live performances in different rooms as well as outside. If we rely on reverb to make our stuff sound good, does that mean that what we wrote isn't as good as it could be. I'm mainly speaking about myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike Hewer on Jun 20, 2018 8:21:16 GMT
About reverb from someone who probably shouldn't say anything. I suppose we need it to enhance computer recordings. It can do that, but it can also hide a multitude of sins. I have listened to many live performances in different rooms as well as outside. If we rely on reverb to make our stuff sound good, does that mean that what we wrote isn't as good as it could be. I'm mainly speaking about myself. I do mainly orchestral these days so in a way I have no choice but to use it. If done well, adding reverb plants the music in a spacial relation to the listener and within itself, and is a crucial aspect in getting the music across to the listener. Does it hide bad work? Well you'd have to swamp it in ambience (always a danger anyway), but even then, the notes will still speak for themselves imo, unless you have post-prodded them all the way to the Everglades. |
|
|
|
Post by rayinstirling on Jun 20, 2018 11:40:41 GMT
The big problem when many learned composer/musicians listen to a recording of a piece is, they can pretty well ignore production deficiencies by seeing the wood regardless of the trees. The untrained but majority of ears however are drawn to the deficiencies because they rely of references from other well recorded pieces.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Porter on Jun 20, 2018 12:23:45 GMT
I didn't mean that we shouldn't use reverb. Just that we should use the utmost discretion.
I once wrote some music for a play my daughter was directing. The room it was being played in had terrible acoustics and much reverb. So when I produced the recording for my music, I did it without any reverb. My reasoning was that if real musicians were playing that they would do so without reverb. The room would provide it just like a real performance. I'm sure I was the only one who noticed what was going on.
|
|
