Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 49 of 49

Thread: My Compositional Journey

  1. #46
    Senior Member aleazk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    3,475
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fredx2098 View Post
    Thank you! Perhaps I ought to amend the soprano part. But in the slower tempo, I would agree with Phil that it was hard to sustain interest and sounded dull. It's meant to have more articulate rhythm than a typical Feldman piece. Somehow I must have accidentally changed the tempo to 55bpm when it was supposed to be 66, and I felt like it had a negative impact on the flow of the piece. I want to keep expanding the piece into a song cycle with Frank O'Hara poems. What I have so far would be like a wordless prelude, and there would be a lot of different moods later on. I'm glad you enjoyed it!
    Hmm, I just found that the rhythmic movement was a bit too mechanical and that this was at odds with the nature of the piece, which it does seem to have some Feldman vibe to me. In a slower tempo (actually, just a little bit, not 10 points, maybe just 5), the rhythm would be less sharp edged. On the other hand, the things that will get the listener interested are the changes, if they are interesting, which is the case in this piece, I don't see the slower flow as being really that determinant on this issue. For instance, you have Cage's number pieces which can be rather slow in changing (even more than Feldman), but they are interesting if one goes with the adequate mindset. Anyway, just my perception. Another way could be to make the attacks a bit softer, the midi reproductions certainly are not very helpful for that, unfortunately!
    Last edited by aleazk; Today at 00:03.

  2. #47
    Senior Member Vasks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,398
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fredx2098 View Post
    made a recording of what I have so far using practice bells and cymbals because those are the closest things I have https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qBv...ew?usp=sharing
    I suggest you re-think Xylophone as the glockenspiel's resonance is atmospheric where as the dry sound of the xylo will not be

    Quote Originally Posted by Fredx2098 View Post
    Here's the score as accurately as I could make it with MuseScore. The gongs aren't supposed to be in treble clef: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y4c...ew?usp=sharing
    Since you are using just two non-pitched percussion instruments, it is standard to assign the lower sounding one to a lower line or space of the staff and assign the higher sounding one to an upper line or space so the player can visually see which instrument to change to. It is also standard to indicate with words types of beaters and placement of attacks above the staff and not capitalize. However, you may (and sort of did) wish to use different note head shapes (X & diamond) to aid in not having to indicate with words (after the first time you do use words) the placement of attacks.
    Last edited by Vasks; Today at 00:46.
    "Music in any generation is not what the public thinks of it but what the musicians make of it"....Virgil Thomson

  3. #48
    Senior Member Fredx2098's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Indiana, USA
    Posts
    378
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aleazk View Post
    Hmm, I just found that the rhythmic movement was a bit too mechanical and that this was at odds with the nature of the piece, which it does seem to have some Feldman vibe to me. In a slower tempo (actually, just a little bit, not 10 points, maybe just 5), the rhythm would be less sharp edged. On the other hand, the things that will get the listener interested are the changes, if they are interesting, which is the case in this piece, I don't see the slower flow as being really that determinant on this issue. For instance, you have Cage's number pieces which can be rather slow in changing (even more than Feldman), but they are interesting if one goes with the adequate mindset. Anyway, just my perception. Another way could be to make the attacks a bit softer, the midi reproductions certainly are not very helpful for that, unfortunately!
    The midi "performance" certainly doesn't do the piece any favors in terms of the mechanical tempo and flow! I think a real performance would benefit from a loose Larghetto tempo, and the real rhythms would be more articulated rather than sounding droney like it does here. The real rhythms are lost in the midi recording, but if you look at the score you might get a better idea of the rhythms as opposed to just hearing a clarinet and soprano droning on a couple notes. I don't want to directly copy Feldman (at least not all the time) which is why that piece is a bit more rhythmic and dynamic, but the harmonies are definitely inspired by his, and the rhythms are precise and abstract like his except not as disconnected and incomprehensible. Personally, I like the way the piano gets more intense at parts to make some very short "dramatic" sounding sections. The piano is almost used more in a rhythmic and percussive way, and it's meant to create sharp edged rhythms to contrast with the other parts which are slower and more gentle. I love extremely slow tempos, but at least with a midi performance it doesn't produce the rhythms I want. Maybe the first song will be very slow and less rhythmic to contrast with such a boisterous prelude!

  4. #49
    Senior Member Fredx2098's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Indiana, USA
    Posts
    378
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vasks View Post
    I suggest you re-think Xylophone as the glockenspiel's resonance is atmospheric where as the dry sound of the xylo will not be
    I have been considering which instrument would be best. I felt that the dry timbre of the xylophone contrasted with the resonance of the gongs in an interesting way, but maybe glockenspiel or vibraphone would be even better and create more complex resonating harmonies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vasks View Post
    Since you are using just two non-pitched percussion instruments, it is standard to assign the lower sounding one to a lower line or space of the staff and assign the higher sounding one to an upper line or space so the player can visually see which instrument to change to. It is also standard to indicate with words types of beaters and placement of attacks above the staff and not capitalize. However, you may (and sort of did) wish to use different note head shapes (X & diamond) to aid in not having to indicate with words (after the first time you do use words) the placement of attacks.
    My use of the gongs is all about the placement of the attack and the beaters used, so I think standard notation would be way too cluttered, such as when quickly switching from different parts of the gongs, and especially things like the measure with a grace note using the timpani mallet and the full attack with the rubber mallet. I feel like the notation I came up with is pretty intuitive. The lower gong is on the lower half of the staff and the higher one on the upper half, and the three attack placements go up from the darkest to brightest tone. The line at the top is the notation key, and it seems fairly easy to memorize (though I can't really say since the ideas are from my head). I feel like using the standard method of notation would make the music a bit hectic and cluttered.

    Thanks for your input!

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •