Through The Woods

Ok........ I am going to try and give feedback on a piece posted again.

DISCLAIMER: It's not personal. I do not know anyone on this forum personally, with the possible exceptions of 3-4 members. (And I consider them all friends)I DO NOT HAVE AN AGENDA (I could care less, and frankly if it was not for internet addiction I wouldn't comment) IT's JUST AN OPINION, and I am only trying to help. Please simply disregard anything that does not work for you.

Did ya hear that "Bitch Boy Billie"? It is actually possible to be friends and have different opinions.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________

First: There are a lot of really nice ideas, and I love the limited use of instruments. (ie. Only woodwinds).

I am going to Over-Focus on the negative because that is what is going to help you the most.

The micro is effecting the macro. The lack of understanding (don't mean to take a pretentious tone with this) of the various possibilities of your material
and how to separate them for more variations with fewer ideas.


Your work reminds me of Jolivet. (Whose music I adore)

(I have a modified Schenkerian view. I just found his writing on music so clear and for me the most useful)


Ok......so you have this.




When I write material like this I always see/hear two distinct parts. a "SINGLE LINE COUNTERPOINT"

Then the material not on 1 (this can be varied of course, but let's start with the most straight forward) I would say is another distinct layer" Contrapuntal Motif". To show you want I mean I hear your opening line as this. (even if it was just solo clarinet. It does not matter.....I see this in my mind's ear."





One of the things causing the

By only looking at the above example as a single homophonic line, it's easy to get caught up where you are. Thus too much rhythmic unisons, or homogenized textures, makes us lose the independence of parts, and more as unified.

It's like having people talk at the same time. If they avoid the same "attack' point, people can follow two dialogues.


Once we get your third layer:




So much is happening at the same time that clarity begins to lose focus.

PLEASE NOTE: I am not suggesting anything is "Better than". What I am saying is "The Best Strategy is the one that gives you the most options" so you are not painted into a corner. I went thru a chess-playing phase and basically if you are cornered it is because of something in your blind spot from a few moves ago.


One thing you did, but abandoned, that I really liked was when the 2nd clarinet came in the 2nd bar. (measure 6 overall)



See the Bb,C,D .......that's nice ! It gets away from the "ping-pong" pedal point you have been riding so far.


OK......for clarity I am going to break this up into another post or two.

 

Let's talk "SCHEME"

The way you presented your material leads me to believe you are thinking of the ideas like this.





Now idea 2 appears, but with idea 1.



Next:

Idea 3, and this gets placed on top of 1&2




That's the opening 12 measures.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________


What I - personally (can we get a neon flashing sign) - would organize them as

1.




2.




2B. (THIS IS STILL 2 BUT A VARIATION ON 2) * It does not matter if I group with 2 as you do or not. Grouping comes later in my mind.




3.




This one I think needs to be rewritten as it's clashing. Bar three you have that minor 9th (Eb over D) and it sticks out like a dogs balls. (I had a teacher always tell me that, and it sticks in my mind)


So now.....with this Alternate (not saying correct - alternate) view...... let me make a variation or two for you.

 

I really admire your attempt to write for just woodwinds, John. Your piece shows promise.

Doug: Wow! Your comments gave me much to think about even though you are commenting someone else's work. This forum really is a goldmine thanks to these types of comments.

 

OK.

So now PART 2 of SCHEME. I PERSONALLY do what I am about to show you on a Pencil and Paper, just because it is easier for me.

I like to create a whole bunch of almost like "sticky" notes of small motives. VARIED REPETITION is important in my work.
The good thing and bad thing about Sibelius is I have to make decisions on the form. What is the opening and so forth?
The bad side is I find it hampers my just "Creative Dump" and Brainstorming. ....but again......that is just me.


Now that I have segregated some of the materials, I am going to make little variations on them.
My aim is to make them each stand on their own. They don't have to be complex at all, just closer observation gives me more reflection.

I most likely won't have the time to talk about "Form/and Structure", but I think about it when creating these little variations. Sometimes it just pops out "Oh that would be great for a return" etc.

I do have one comment though for your piece.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Green Eggs and Ham, and your musical structure.
You know the story right?

Would you like them here or there?
I would not like them here or there.
I would not like them anywhere.

I don't give a fuck where you go with the piece but leaving the piece in C minor @ :35 is holding it back.
Go to B min, Eb, F# ....who cares where......just move on from C.

(BTW: Your mock-up sounds really lovely. I am impressed.)
_______________________________________________________________________________

I AM GOING TO TRY AND STAY AS CLOSE AS I CAN TO YOUR IDEA. (Basically I am trying as best as I can not to force DOUG GIBSON onto this work.)



OK. These again are just sticky notes. How can I write 10x's material with 10% of the effort? Or another way to say it: Weave the largest musical universe with the smallest thread. Pieces that focus on a few ideas extensively tend to be (not always) more successful than ones that explore a lot of ideas but with little development.


1. To create a little more contrast: I am taking the downbeat 1 notes and moving them up an octave. I now exchanged an 8th note from measure 2 for measure 1.

So something like this.

I like to actually give these little "sticky notes" names. So let's say I call this "Cathedral 1A" or something.


Let's say I assign the music to 1 Oboe, and one Clarinet.




* (You can tell I am not a huge fan of the repeating F's and Eb's. So I moved one of them down to D. More variety IMO)

Ok. Now..... How will the upper line work if it was a bass line? ( In this example I alter your 2nd measure to have the step motion I liked)

Let's say this is Clarinet and Bass Clarinet




Let's say you have triple winds. So I will add in a 3rd clarinet part, but not as active as the one you had. The reason is to have a variety. So I can have a less active, and then a more active. The example below will work with either 3 clarinets, or two clarinets and Bass Clar.





Ok, not let's make another.;

See how you have that G repeating ---- could the same - or similar effect get created by having a long sustain ?




For your third idea --- I like have the accented dissonance your music implies.

So a quick change to your idea 3.






Now I have a fuller texture that might look like this ( Score is Flute, Clarinets, Horn, then Bassoon

 

Remember how I said:

"I most likely won't have the time to talk about "Form/and Structure", but I think about it when creating these little variations. Sometimes it just pops out "Oh that would be great for a return" etc."

Well the material I have now does NOT sound like an opening.

Imagaine then you form is something like a A-B-A-C-D-C-A-B-A

So maybe one of the later 12 bar A sections could become like below. It's is all (at least in my mind) directly from your original material.
Nothing added. Just stretched or twisted.

The point being: You can still use your opening "A" which sounds like an opening, and then via your own discoveries make variations like I outlined.

The overall benefit is faster writing and a greater sense of overall unity.

While we have not discussed form and overall design of the piece, just a few variations can be strung together to make something like:



Since you saw the tragedy that was the other thread you saw how I was "Outed". Your use of midi is a deep existential threat to me, and now the only way for me to feel better about myself is to go out on the beach and find baby seals I can hit on the head until they die.

That's me.


In all sincerity: Thank you for being open-minded to receiving feedback, and if anything helps you I am happy. If anything does NOT work for you, please just disregard it. Treat the above like a buffett.

OK. Be well, and thanks for letting me hear your music

All the very best

Doug

 

@John Eldridge I like your piece very much. I did not read the above comments from @Doug Gibson yet. I wanted to give you my opinion without being influenced by my friend Doug just yet.

This is the sort of writing that could also work for a small group of strings. The melody and textures are very attractive.

I love the way you give the instruments a chance to breathe. This gives the piece realism and humanity and creates natural phrases.

I like the fact that your principal melody is made up of clear motives. If you ever decided to expand this piece that will give you a lot of material for development.

The piece has a natural flow and I can feel a defined beginning, middle, and end, which is a very good thing.

Not much that needs improvement, but I will share my thoughts in case they might help.

The volume level of the accompaniment parts should be lower. Live musicians, if they are any good, will do this naturally, even if all parts have the same dynamic marking. The ones who are playing a supporting part will play softer to let the melody come out. With samples, we have to do that on our own, and if you produce a written score and parts, it is a courtesy to the musicians to mark the dynamics to accomplish this.

Here I take the risk of embarrassing myself, but I did not hear any modulations. So either they aren't there, or you modulate so smoothly that my old ear missed it. Two minutes is sort of long to go without modulation in an art piece. It can certainly be done. The award-winning Michael Kamen Brass Quintet is only 4 minutes long and has no modulations. But I personally find that after about a minute (or even less) my ear tires of the same pitches and I need a new key to keep the music sounding fresh.

That is it. I can't think of anything else to critique. You are very talented. Now I am going to have fun reading Doug's comments and see if we agreed or disagreed.

 

How did it go? Please do tell what got the thumbs up or down.

I hope you are doing great Paul !!

Many best wishes, and wishing you a very wonderful Christmas.

 

HA! Well you caught a lot more detail than I did, which is only to be expected. And you and I both noticed the problem of the instruments sort of canceling each other out. We differed in the solution we offered. So perhaps the ideas of you or I will help John. I am feeling fairly well today. Thanks for asking, and Merry Christmas Eve.

Paul

 

I don't think I have the kind of feedback for you that you could learn anything from, but somehow that piece emotionally struck a chord with me and made me sad because I thought this is the kind of music that my parents might enjoy, and I've never been able to write anything in that style and share it with them and who knows if I'll make it there in time... Christmas is the time for morbid thoughts in my family.

I haven't read the other comments yet, but to me there is a somber beauty in your piece and I hope eventually I'll be able to write something like this as well.

 

To Doug Gibson - you are a total jerk. Thanks for the insults.

Please just get rid of my account here on this forum.