Feedback and help for a newbie

From just looking at the sheet music(it's hard to give detailed feedback without audio) what i see is that maybe you don't modulate enough. It can become boring for the ear if we just use the tones from the key signature we have chosen. You do modulate a little which is good but I just think the piece could used more of it.

Regarding getting good audio on your pieces a good place to start is noteperformer which i am sure also works for Sibelius and you don't have to spend a lot of time doing mock ups so it's a huge time saver.

 

Hi Claire, I think it will be better if you share the Sibelius audio.

I would say it doesn't matter if you are a beginner you will have to learn how to use them anyway, but maybe pick one of the most common so you can find more tutorials: Cubase, Logic, Pro Tools, Digital Performer, Reaper.

 

Hi Claire,

I can't listen to the piece properly now so I'll reply to your second question (I was recently asked the same thing so the whole discussion is still fresh in my mind):

Ask yourself what your goal is first. Is it to be able to make film/TV-ready productions of orchestral music (and music in general), or do you just want to hear how your pieces will roughly sound without the Sibelius playback?

If it's the former, that's easily months if not years' worth of work, depending on whether you have someone mentoring you. Months if you do, years if you don't. YouTube will help. Also, be ready to drop thousands on software over a couple of years (and most likely a thousand or more right at the start), because it's very easy to be led astray if you're just starting on your own. Everyone will give you different advice on what to buy because there's just so much out there and not everyone owns everything. Here, forums can help as much as they can lead you astray. Again, it would be great if you have someone who's knowledgeable here (and preferably you admire their work) and ask them about it. Even if you pay them for counseling, you'll save a lot of money you would otherwise drop on stuff you won't use, and a lot of time you'd otherwise spend looking for software, reading reviews, and watching YouTube videos.

If you just want to hear how your pieces sound in a way that's better than Sibelius playback, you have two options here (that I know of; anyone can add to my answer).

Since you already have Sibelius and are familiar with it, you can get Noteperformer. It's industry-standard by now, won't break your bank (something like $130) and it was written for Sibelius. It's by no means production quality, but it's lightyears ahead of stock Sibelius playback. And it's getting big updates every few years, with a lot of smaller ones in-between. It will not disrupt your current workflow, it will work with all of your existing scores, and all you have to do once you install it is enable it in Sibelius' playback settings.

If having better playback of your scores is what you're after, this is the most painless and cheapest option for you right now.



Another option is StaffPad. StaffPad is a pen-entry notation app with an amazing playback engine that allows for the integration of some popular orchestral libraries. Base StaffPad sounds already sound decent, but it's not quite amazing, much like Noteperformer. The 3rd party libraries are offered as light versions for the StaffPad app exclusively and each one costs $99. If you're getting an entire orchestra, along with solo strings and piano, you're most likely looking at $500 or so, plus the StaffPad app which is ~$130.

StaffPad works on Windows with pen entry and iPad. You can run it on the latest M1 MacBooks and listen to your scores, but you can't input anything without an iPad. If you have an iPad and Sidecar it to your MacBook, you can then enter the notes while StaffPad is running on the MacBook.

I don't know how attractive does pen entry notation sound to you, but even if it doesn't, you can just import your scores from Sibelius as XML files. I have not tried this yet, but can do it next week and report back.

With StaffPad, if you have the latest MacBook or an iPad, you're dropping ~$650 and your workflow would be to export XML files from Sibelius, open it in StaffPad and render it to a file there with its playback engine. It's articulation-sensitive when it comes to orchestral instruments, so you'll have to edit your older scores if you're not paying attention to that, and do it when composing your future pieces.

If you like the pen entry workflow in StaffPad, you can also compose there. It's cool if you just want to outside and compose somewhere out of the house, or take it with you on a trip since all you have to pack is an iPad.

 

Then it sounds like StaffPad might be what you're looking for. As I've said, you can just run your Sibelius scores through it for great playback. It's not quite production-quality but it's close enough, and much better than NotePerformer.

It is hands-down best bang-for-buck for anyone not familiar with music production in a DAW, but who's already familiar with notation who just wants to hear how their pieces sound.

I'd just like to add that StaffPad is a composition tool, not an engraving tool. White it has plenty of features and you can notate almost anything, it doesn't offer a lot of options for deciding how your scores will look. So for actual professional presentation of scores and die-hard engraving, I would still do it in Sibelius.

 

Hello Claire,

Welcome! I’m also a newbie to the forum and looking forward to receiving the insights of like-minded individuals seeking to improve their compositional craft.

I really like the atmosphere you create at the beginning. The quartal harmonies and the layering all works well!

In the opening 6/4 section, it appears from the highly syncopated rhythms, that the RH melodies are meant to be rather “free” (rubato), so that it doesn’t rigidly align with the meter. I think you are trying to overwrite much of your desired rubato in the melodic writing (possibly so your software will “play” more musically). The more precise you notate your rubatos as syncopations, however, a performer will tend to read it too literally, making it too jagged (if it doesn’t look smooth, it won’t sound smooth). I think it’s better to simplify the rhythmic notation and allow the performer to create the desired rubato.

Attached is a pdf of the way I would suggest notating the rhythms to make them more user friendly along with a recording of me playing it with rubato.



https://www.dropbox.com/s/a3e92remnx75zu8/Claire ForestNight.mp3?dl=0

 

Strange that I can see the pdf in my post... but here it is again:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uhbt4yt1246d9zz/Claire ForestNight.pdf?dl=0