# My Compositional Journey



## Fredx2098

For most of my life I've desired to make music of all kinds. So far most of it has not been classical, because I am not knowledgeable enough in music theory. However I do have some pieces that I composed several years ago, a suite of 3 piano nocturnes. They could be juvenilia or an op. 1 depending on how much merit others believe they have.

Here is a sub-par recording of them played be me (a mediocre pianist), on an old piano that was not in the best shape, recorded with a phone: https://thepurplevoid.bandcamp.com/album/solo-piano

Here is the sheet music: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1JOi7bK55ilBgdIOsw8jXQkFJLv-6P49T?usp=sharing

They're inspired mostly by Satie and Chopin if it isn't obvious. I have plans to rework them into something longer, more modern, and less simplistic. I also have plans to compose a modern duet for violin and cello, because two of my cousins play those instruments and seem interested in playing a piece that I would compose for them.


----------



## Phil loves classical

I think you have potential. Try experimenting by changing your left hand chord more often to achieve different chord accompaniments to go with your right hand in Nocturne 1. Nocturne 2 is more rhythmically varied which is good. I think the harmony around 0:10 seems not to fit the other parts, even though is all right on its own right. Nocturne 3 is probably the best in my opinion.


----------



## Fredx2098

Phil loves classical said:


> I think you have potential. Try experimenting by changing your left hand chord more often to achieve different chord accompaniments to go with your right hand.


Thanks! Yeah, one of my main struggles with solo piano is trying to compose a left hand part that is interesting but doesn't sound like a fugue. The variations I have in mind should be an improvement in that respect.


----------



## Fredx2098

Phil loves classical said:


> Nocturne 2 is more rhythmically varied which is good. I think the harmony around 0:10 seems not to fit the other parts, even though is all right on its own right. Nocturne 3 is probably the best in my opinion.


Nocturne 2 is meant to be a little jarring like that. I want my music to be harmonically complex and abnormal. People have also criticized my use of open 5ths in the left hand, which was also intentional.

I'm glad you like Nocturne 3. That's probably my favorite as well, especially the way it ends. Overall, these three pieces are very simple as they're my first foray into composing serious, structured pieces, but they have some interesting ideas here and there I believe. I have some other very short pieces or sketches that show progression in harmony and counterpoint. I might post them here, but I should probably develop the ideas more first.


----------



## Fredx2098

I don't know how/if I composed this, but I must have been channeling Feldman: https://thepurplevoid.bandcamp.com/track/patterns-for-piano-i-triad


----------



## Phil loves classical

I think you need a lot more variation on the right hand notes. The left has a bit, but also needs more. Try to analyse his Piano (1977).


----------



## Fredx2098

Phil loves classical said:


> I think you need a lot more variation on the right hand notes. The left has a bit, but also needs more. Try to analyse his Piano (1977).


I think it was most certainly an improvisation. I don't even remember recording it, but I think I may have approximated the tone.


----------



## Guest

Just listened to the nocturnes and thought they were overall very nice. I like the static nature to them, the regularity of phrase lengths keeps it in 'one place' and allows a strong consistency to prevail in each nocturne. They all have a nice pop/anime piano aesthetic to them.

Currently listening to _Patterns, For Piano I (Triad)_ and this actually feels a lot more direction-driven or unpredictable rather than falling into regular pattern-based music that the nocturnes are. If this is an improvisation, I think it certainly shows your musical impulse, although now at under 15 minutes it probably needs something more to help it along, something to break the established aesthetic to make your established aesthetic even more powerful.......


----------



## Fredx2098

shirime said:


> Just listened to the nocturnes and thought they were overall very nice. I like the static nature to them, the regularity of phrase lengths keeps it in 'one place' and allows a strong consistency to prevail in each nocturne. They all have a nice pop/anime piano aesthetic to them.
> 
> Currently listening to _Patterns, For Piano I (Triad)_ and this actually feels a lot more direction-driven or unpredictable rather than falling into regular pattern-based music that the nocturnes are. If this is an improvisation, I think it certainly shows your musical impulse, although now at under 15 minutes it probably needs something more to help it along, something to break the established aesthetic to make your established aesthetic even more powerful.......


Thank you so much! I had forgotten about the improvisation until I went to post my nocturnes. Most of the things on my bandcamp page are demos or proofs-of-concepts. It's certainly underdeveloped, but it's wonderful that I have 15 minutes of improvisation to pick through for motives! Listening to it again, it sounds like I was improvising at first but halfway through I formed a developed idea.

I really need a real piano for my music though. I went to college for music for a pitifully short time, but there were real pianos and a celesta that I could use, and I could improvise and compose on them very well. At home now I have only a digital piano and it's totally emotionless. It's killing me!


----------



## Guest

Fredx2098 said:


> Thank you so much! I had forgotten about the improvisation until I went to post my nocturnes. Most of the things on my bandcamp page are demos or proofs-of-concepts. It's certainly underdeveloped, but it's wonderful that I have 15 minutes of improvisation to pick through for motives! Listening to it again, it sounds like I was improvising at first but halfway through I formed a developed idea.
> 
> I really need a real piano for my music though. I went to college for music for a pitifully short time, but there were real pianos and a celesta that I could use, and I could improvise and compose on them very well. At home now I have only a digital piano and it's totally emotionless. It's killing me!


That's fair. Stravinsky used a piano when composing but I guess that's not for everyone (personally, I never use a piano). Yes it is fantastic to improvise, and I am glad you've found a way to obtain sounds you like from improvisations.


----------



## Fredx2098

shirime said:


> That's fair. Stravinsky used a piano when composing but I guess that's not for everyone (personally, I never use a piano). Yes it is fantastic to improvise, and I am glad you've found a way to obtain sounds you like from improvisations.


What's your method? I'm not the most efficient with music theory, but I have a basic understanding. I have performed in a concert band playing percussion, as well as choirs and pit bands. I also played saxophone in high school band. I find sheet music for those things very easy to interpret, but for some reason there's a disconnect with piano. The only breakthroughs I've had have been on real pianos. I feel like I haven't had enough experience with real instruments to compose effectively.


----------



## Guest

Fredx2098 said:


> What's your method? I'm not the most efficient with music theory, but I have a basic understanding. I have performed in a concert band playing percussion, as well as choirs and pit bands. I also played saxophone in high school band. I find sheet music for those things very easy to interpret, but for some reason there's a disconnect with piano. The only breakthroughs I've had have been on real pianos. I feel like I haven't had enough experience with real instruments to compose effectively.


Often I write from my head onto the paper and then engrave it in LilyPond or Sibelius. There's never enough I can know about instruments, so I often ask musicians for advice on things that are idiomatic to their instruments and how they balance in an ensemble and various types of acoustic spaces.


----------



## Fredx2098

shirime said:


> Often I write from my head onto the paper and then engrave it in LilyPond or Sibelius. There's never enough I can know about instruments, so I often ask musicians for advice on things that are idiomatic to their instruments and how they balance in an ensemble and various types of acoustic spaces.


What kind of training have you had? I've tried several different types of private instruction and classes. They're helpful, but most of my knowledge seems to come from what I research and figure out myself. I think I'm improving just by using this website. I think I may be starting to hear sheet music in my head and compose in my head. Is there a specific notation program that you would recommend to someone slightly above beginner level? I've also been told that it's wise to begin composing with solo piano or string quartet, and with short pieces. Would you agree with that?


----------



## Phil loves classical

that is how I started: solo piano miniatures. Musescore is free and user friendly. Lilypond is also free but is more like writing code scripts, good if you just want to input text rather than clicking the mouse over palettes. It was voted the best engraving program in terms of aesthetics.


----------



## Guest

Fredx2098 said:


> What kind of training have you had? I've tried several different types of private instruction and classes. They're helpful, but most of my knowledge seems to come from what I research and figure out myself. I think I'm improving just by using this website. I think I may be starting to hear sheet music in my head and compose in my head. Is there a specific notation program that you would recommend to someone slightly above beginner level? I've also been told that it's wise to begin composing with solo piano or string quartet, and with short pieces. Would you agree with that?


For as long as I've tried composing I've found it most useful to take my music to musicians and composers and ask for feedback. I'm currently doing an undergraduate degree in composition at the University of Melbourne and I read a lot of books and scores from the music library to help myself understand the kinds of possibilities there are and to push myself to expand my craft and hone in to the aesthetic I most want to write.

Notation software is the devil unless it's LilyPond. If you use any other software, *mute the sound* or it will stunt your inner hearing.

Do lots of sight singing exercises as well. Sing lots, actually. Have you been in a choir?


----------



## Fredx2098

shirime said:


> For as long as I've tried composing I've found it most useful to take my music to musicians and composers and ask for feedback. I'm currently doing an undergraduate degree in composition at the University of Melbourne and I read a lot of books and scores from the music library to help myself understand the kinds of possibilities there are and to push myself to expand my craft and hone in to the aesthetic I most want to write.
> 
> Notation software is the devil unless it's LilyPond. If you use any other software, *mute the sound* or it will stunt your inner hearing.
> 
> Do lots of sight singing exercises as well. Sing lots, actually. Have you been in a choir?


That's cool! I was going to UIC for music for just under a semester, sadly. I overloaded myself, on top of my chronic pain which is a huge obstacle for everything in my life. I have several scores to study, some for more strictly academic purposes such as The Well-Tempered Clavier and Beethoven's piano sonatas (which are listed as crucial for Schoenberg's Fundamentals of Musical Composition and contain some works that I find tolerable by him), then some for more personal reasons like Chopin's Preludes and Etudes, Brahm's Symphonies, Piano Quartets and Quintet, The Rite of Spring, and the scores of my 2 favorite Feldman pieces (which are in his own handwriting, which couldn't be any better for a Feldman addict such as myself). In order to get closer to the tone I want to use to compose, I should probably get more modern scores by a diverse assortment of composers.

LilyPond looks very interesting, but also very confusing. Using real paper is definitely my favorite way to compose. MuseScore seems like the most intuitive program I've used so far. I have to say that the playback functions of notation software has been consistently god-awful in my experience, though I saw some software mentioned in another thread that's supposed to be less terrible. I feel like the sound of digital pianos are nearly as bad. If you haven't guessed by now, I want to make music that focuses on exploring complex harmonics and resonance of an instrument/instruments with itself and others. On real instruments, I could make the sounds I wanted and it felt very natural, but with digital instruments it feels like I have to try harder than it should be.

I love singing. I was in choir for all of high school and during my short stint in college. Like I said, I find monophonic music extremely easy to read and interpret, and the opposite for polyphonic music, especially piano. One of the classes I took in college was completely focused on sight-singing exercises. It was wonderful, though I find it hard to apply that to the music I desire to make because I'm almost exclusively interested in dissonance. I have a feeling that it would be beneficial for me to learn to compose in an extremely standard common practice way, so that I would know the "rules" and how to break them most efficiently, so to speak. I still have the books I used in the classes so I can study them. I felt like we were focusing on extremely basic stuff, like stuff that a person going to college for music should already know, actually some stuff that was presupposed that we know for the entrance exam.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

shirime said:


> For as long as I've tried composing I've found it most useful to take my music to musicians and composers and ask for feedback. I'm currently doing an undergraduate degree in composition at the University of Melbourne and I read a lot of books and scores from the music library to help myself understand the kinds of possibilities there are and to push myself to expand my craft and hone in to the aesthetic I most want to write.
> 
> Notation software is the devil unless it's LilyPond. If you use any other software, *mute the sound* or it will stunt your inner hearing.
> 
> Do lots of sight singing exercises as well. Sing lots, actually. Have you been in a choir?


I don't know if having sound has hurt my hearing. It really is no different from using a piano.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Fredx2098 said:


> That's cool! I was going to UIC for music for just under a semester, sadly. I overloaded myself, on top of my chronic pain which is a huge obstacle for everything in my life. I have several scores to study, some for more strictly academic purposes such as The Well-Tempered Clavier and Beethoven's piano sonatas (which are listed as crucial for Schoenberg's Fundamentals of Musical Composition and contain some works that I find tolerable by him), then some for more personal reasons like Chopin's Preludes and Etudes, Brahm's Symphonies, Piano Quartets and Quintet, The Rite of Spring, and the scores of my 2 favorite Feldman pieces (which are in his own handwriting, which couldn't be any better for a Feldman addict such as myself). In order to get closer to the tone I want to use to compose, I should probably get more modern scores by a diverse assortment of composers.
> 
> LilyPond looks very interesting, but also very confusing. Using real paper is definitely my favorite way to compose. MuseScore seems like the most intuitive program I've used so far. I have to say that the playback functions of notation software has been consistently god-awful in my experience, though I saw some software mentioned in another thread that's supposed to be less terrible. I feel like the sound of digital pianos are nearly as bad. If you haven't guessed by now, I want to make music that focuses on exploring complex harmonics and resonance of an instrument/instruments with itself and others. On real instruments, I could make the sounds I wanted and it felt very natural, but with digital instruments it feels like I have to try harder than it should be.
> 
> I love singing. I was in choir for all of high school and during my short stint in college. Like I said, I find monophonic music extremely easy to read and interpret, and the opposite for polyphonic music, especially piano. One of the classes I took in college was completely focused on sight-singing exercises. It was wonderful, though I find it hard to apply that to the music I desire to make because I'm almost exclusively interested in dissonance. I have a feeling that it would be beneficial for me to learn to compose in an extremely standard common practice way, so that I would know the "rules" and how to break them most efficiently, so to speak. I still have the books I used in the classes so I can study them. I felt like we were focusing on extremely basic stuff, like stuff that a person going to college for music should already know, actually some stuff that was presupposed that we know for the entrance exam.


Regardless of how much you study, the best way to improve your composition skills is to write more music!


----------



## Fredx2098

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> I don't know if having sound has hurt my hearing. It really is no different from using a piano.


I don't think it would necessarily bad to use playback features once in a while to see if you've input the notes correctly and such, but it seems like it would be easy to use it as a crutch, and I definitely want to avoid that. Conversely, I feel like if I could practice using a real piano it would actually help my hearing and help me understand harmony more. With digital instruments, it's just multiple bland sound files being played simultaneously, whereas a real piano resonates with itself and changes the feeling of the harmonies. It wouldn't be a big deal if I wanted to make tonal music, but I want my music to be _about _the mutual resonance of instruments and harmonic complexity created.


----------



## Guest

@*E Cristobal Poveda*

What Fred said.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

huh. I just write out individual parts first.


----------



## Fredx2098

I just composed this piece as an experiment of sorts. I came up with the first 2 bars on the piano but the rest in my head. It's meant to be slightly minimal without too much repetition and to have strange, complex harmonies and changes in rhythm. I think it sounds happy, which isn't my favorite mood of music. It kind of sounds like a strange twisted version of the aforementioned anime piano sound. Take it as you will.....

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ftsQNvps16Jc2bcmSDnIoi7R4QDLWh3a

Here's (hopefully) a link to a "performance" of the piece:

http://www.driveplayer.com/#fileIds=1zrNtxSztJ-krQaBiahHu6VrHKVpNrhX_&userId={userId}


----------



## Fredx2098

For some reason it isn't letting me edit any of my posts in this thread, so here is hopefully a working link to the "performance":

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zrNtxSztJ-krQaBiahHu6VrHKVpNrhX_/view?usp=sharing


----------



## Phil loves classical

This is probably your best work here. I'd add some dynamics or rhythm change on the right hand around 0:19 throughout when your playing the same note


----------



## Fredx2098

Thanks! The other things I posted are from a few years ago, so I wanted to post something that might show my progress since then. I agree that that section needs some more development. The whole thing could be developed a little more and could be expanded into a more substantial piece I think.


----------



## Fredx2098

Like I mentioned in some other thread, I want to compose a completely atonal 12-tone serial piece. Is there a method for composing tone rows in one's head without having advanced inner hearing skills, or should I probably use a piano?


----------



## Phil loves classical

Fredx2098 said:


> Like I mentioned in some other thread, I want to compose a completely atonal 12-tone serial piece. Is there a method for composing tone rows in one's head without having advanced inner hearing skills, or should I probably use a piano?


good luck composing a 12 tone piece in your head. It isn't improvisational, and is about following certain rules. I just tried out a total serialistic piece arrived by as much random parameters as I could allow. It sounded less than inspiring to me.  Better to find some interesting combinations, etc. by writing it all out and experimenting.


----------



## Fredx2098

My plan is to compose a piece that is extremely calm and gentle to contrast with the intense cacophony which is frequently created with atonal music. I'm not totally familiar with all the rules, but I'm not too keen on following rules anyhow. My main concern is using tone rows to avoid a tonal center. I probably don't want it to be the whole formula of full-on 12-tone serialism.


----------



## Guest

Fredx2098 said:


> My plan is to compose a piece that is extremely calm and gentle to contrast with the intense cacophony which is frequently created with atonal music. I'm not totally familiar with all the rules, but I'm not too keen on following rules anyhow. My main concern is using tone rows to avoid a tonal center. I probably don't want it to be the whole formula of full-on 12-tone serialism.


Would you consider using a row of a different length?


----------



## Fredx2098

shirime said:


> Would you consider using a row of a different length?


Definitely. I was thinking I could use fragments of rows to create phrases and motives to make a more cohesive and comprehensible piece rather than avoiding all sense of familiarity. I assume you mean rows smaller than 12 notes, or do you have an idea for rows that are longer? That could be cool.

That reminds me of a conversation I had with a professor comparing the styles of Schoenberg, Webern, and Berg. He said Webern sounds the most atonal because he always/usually finishes his tone rows, which seems to imply that the others sometimes used fragments.

My understanding of the technique is pretty limited. If I'm not mistaken, isn't one of the goals to avoid any melody or harmony that alludes to tonality? That's another guideline that I don't want to specifically follow. I think dissonant music that occasionally alludes to tonality is awesome, like Ives.


----------



## Guest

Fredx2098 said:


> Definitely. I was thinking I could use fragments of rows to create phrases and motives to make a more cohesive and comprehensible piece rather than avoiding all sense of familiarity. I assume you mean rows smaller than 12 notes, or do you have an idea for rows that are longer? That could be cool.
> 
> That reminds me of a conversation I had with a professor comparing the styles of Schoenberg, Webern, and Berg. He said Webern sounds the most atonal because he always/usually finishes his tone rows, which seems to imply that the others sometimes used fragments.
> 
> My understanding of the technique is pretty limited. If I'm not mistaken, isn't one of the goals to avoid any melody or harmony that alludes to tonality? That's another guideline that I don't want to specifically follow. I think dissonant music that occasionally alludes to tonality is awesome, like Ives.


13 or more is an option, same as 11 or fewer.

Well, as I understand it, the only 'goals' you have with serialism are the goals you have for your compositions. What you personally want your music to sound like is more important than following someone else's aesthetic concerns. There are a bunch of different approaches and procedures that you can use with a series or row of notes. There are the usual transformations (transposition, retrograde, inversion and combinations of them) but you can also find your own way around a row through fragmenting it how you like or dividing it into equal or unequal reservoirs (breaking the row up into different pitch sets that you can develop freely and independently). These fragments or reservoirs can also be developed and transformed however you like as well; something I often do is create a chord with a fixed register and voicing, and then expand the chord by multiplying it against its inversion creating much larger fixed-register chords.

Also, don't forget that you can apply serial procedures to other things, like intervals and rhythmic cells.

Have you thought about the intervallic structure of your potential row? That tends to be something quite important in terms of creating an identifiable and unique harmonic 'sound' to your serial piece. Webern's music is probably the 'most atonal' because his rows were often combinatorial and only a few transformations of a row would cover all possible combinations of intervals. He sometimes did leave out a note here and there, but only if it was recently present in another line of the texture and thus he could more efficiently complete the aggregate of pitches.


----------



## Fredx2098

shirime said:


> 13 or more is an option, same as 11 or fewer.
> 
> Well, as I understand it, the only 'goals' you have with serialism are the goals you have for your compositions. What you personally want your music to sound like is more important than following someone else's aesthetic concerns. There are a bunch of different approaches and procedures that you can use with a series or row of notes. There are the usual transformations (transposition, retrograde, inversion and combinations of them) but you can also find your own way around a row through fragmenting it how you like or dividing it into equal or unequal reservoirs (breaking the row up into different pitch sets that you can develop freely and independently). These fragments or reservoirs can also be developed and transformed however you like as well; something I often do is create a chord with a fixed register and voicing, and then expand the chord by multiplying it against its inversion creating much larger fixed-register chords.
> 
> Also, don't forget that you can apply serial procedures to other things, like intervals and rhythmic cells.
> 
> Have you thought about the intervallic structure of your potential row? That tends to be something quite important in terms of creating an identifiable and unique harmonic 'sound' to your serial piece. Webern's music is probably the 'most atonal' because his rows were often combinatorial and only a few transformations of a row would cover all possible combinations of intervals. He sometimes did leave out a note here and there, but only if it was recently present in another line of the texture and thus he could more efficiently complete the aggregate of pitches.


Thanks for the ideas! But yes, I don't really want to adhere myself to the musical ideals of others, but I think it can be helpful to test out established ideas for composition practice, the same way I sometimes feel like trying to write a fugue or happy little Classical-era type piece.

How would one create intervals and rhythms in a serial way? Would that involve making a closed list of intervals/rhythms and assigning them in a serial way? That reminds me of a time I used dice for Dungeons & Dragons to determine pitches and rhythms for a string quartet, making each measure a closed set so that the rhythms weren't just freely sprawling.

I came up with a row a few days ago. It's all minor seconds and tritones except for one perfect 5th, which I think should be interesting. I plan to develop and transform the left and right hand parts at different speeds in a slow contrapuntal way, letting the dissonances gently clash but also letting the occasional consonance shine through.

Is there some other method for coming up with atonal chords or accompaniment with multiple voices, or do people just think about the intervals of the chord or create new rows for however many voices they want?

I love Webern's music and the idea of of using all the notes and all the intervals very equally. It's sort of like a tonal analogy of white noise. I admire the complexity of a lot of modern composers' ideas, but for my music I want it to be kind of like a tangent to that.


----------



## Fredx2098

I started working on my first atonal serial piece. Here's what I have so far. It's quite formulaic. It consists of 3-bar phrases that establish a single tone row in different permutations and transpositions, and different rhythms in different permutations as well. It's not exactly the calm piece I had in mind, but I don't think it's extremely chaotic either. It's just a practice piece so far anyways.

Score: https://drive.google.com/file/d/13fTHy4a6SeKcMW1AflKx_u_wYFLQXZGc/view?usp=sharing

"Performance": https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EaVgi4Vvo9aW19yFIWXoVZQsvJCDgblL/view?usp=sharing

This is sort of like an intro. I want to continue with a section that uses chords. I'm not really sure how to make chords in a serial way, but I have some ideas.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Fredx2098 said:


> I started working on my first atonal serial piece. Here's what I have so far. It's quite formulaic. It consists of 3-bar phrases that establish a single tone row in different permutations and transpositions, and different rhythms in different permutations as well. It's not exactly the calm piece I had in mind, but I don't think it's extremely chaotic either. It's just a practice piece so far anyways.
> 
> Score: https://drive.google.com/file/d/13fTHy4a6SeKcMW1AflKx_u_wYFLQXZGc/view?usp=sharing
> 
> "Performance": https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EaVgi4Vvo9aW19yFIWXoVZQsvJCDgblL/view?usp=sharing
> 
> This is sort of like an intro. I want to continue with a section that uses chords. I'm not really sure how to make chords in a serial way, but I have some ideas.


I would fine tune the rhythms. Right now the overarching rhythm is mainly eighth notes, with a quarter note here and there. Try adding half notes, and sixteenth notes in places which would add more variation to the rhythm.


----------



## Fredx2098

Phil loves classical said:


> I would fine tune the rhythms. Right now the overarching rhythm is mainly eighth notes, with a quarter note here and there. Try adding half notes, and sixteenth notes in places which would add more variation to the rhythm.


I definitely agree with that. It needs more rhythmic contrast. Part of that is because I tried a little experiment though. Section A has different rhythms for the left and right hands, then section B uses the reverse rhythm of the left hand part in section A for the right hand, and the left hand part uses the reverse rhythm of the original right hand rhythm, along with different iterations of the tone row. It's pretty much section A and then different permutations of what happens in that section. It's definitely a work in progress, but I think I'm headed in the right general direction at least. Thanks for your input!


----------



## Guest

To give the piece a sense of direction you could also do this rhythmically, but gradually introducing new rhythmic ideas based on different note durations. 

You could always divide up your row into chords; multiple notes of the row can sound at the same time to create chords. Are there any pitch sets that unify the row, or are there any chords that are generally suggested by the row? What chords can you make based on the most prominent intervals of your row?


----------



## Fredx2098

I've been working on a piece in my true style of abstract chromaticism. This is also my first chamber sketch rather than solo piano:

Score: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1f5fMhYO-yROPrWh4bKL8zEAUykkCjR4_/view?usp=sharing

"Performance": https://drive.google.com/file/d/1n52kK7I79Wu9m9qlZsiZRfdLn2o-Xg9X/view?usp=sharing

Not tonal I think, and not serial. This is probably the closest thing I've posted that aligns with what I want to create.

Hopefully this will be the intro to a long work inspired by the poems of Frank O'Hara.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Fredx2098 said:


> I've been working on a piece in my true style of abstract chromaticism. This is also my first chamber sketch rather than solo piano:
> 
> Score: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1f5fMhYO-yROPrWh4bKL8zEAUykkCjR4_/view?usp=sharing
> 
> "Performance": https://drive.google.com/file/d/1n52kK7I79Wu9m9qlZsiZRfdLn2o-Xg9X/view?usp=sharing
> 
> Not tonal I think, and not serial. This is probably the closest thing I've posted that aligns with what I want to create.
> 
> Hopefully this will be the intro to a long work inspired by the poems of Frank O'Hara.


It's atmospheric, and has some interesting harmony to me. I would gradually move to different notes. The repetition of the same notes makes it harder to sustain interest, unless you change the rhythms


----------



## Fredx2098

Phil loves classical said:


> It's atmospheric, and has some interesting harmony to me. I would gradually move to different notes. The repetition of the same notes makes it harder to sustain interest, unless you change the rhythms


Hmm, I can see why you'd say that, but like a Feldman piece the notes and rhythms are always changing slightly. In fact, there are some Feldman pieces with even less note and rhythm variation that go on for hours but don't lose my interest. If I continue to develop the piece, there will definitely be more variation based on the rhythm and tone of the poems I use. What I have so far was completely abstract. I thought I could compose the vocals part first and choose the poem second, but now that I wrote that it seems like choosing a poem should come first.


----------



## Guest

Some things of more practical concern:

1. Give the soprano a bit more space to breathe and change register. The tessitura is high for a _long_ stretch of time and this will tire the singer rather quickly.

2. Have you thought about changing the spellings of some of the accidentals to make it a bit more intuitive to read?

Aside from that, this is great. It has a slow pace but the changes of pitch and rhythm are very well paced so that it doesn't become predictably repetitive.


----------



## Fredx2098

shirime said:


> Some things of more practical concern:
> 
> 1. Give the soprano a bit more space to breathe and change register. The tessitura is high for a _long_ stretch of time and this will tire the singer rather quickly.
> 
> 2. Have you thought about changing the spellings of some of the accidentals to make it a bit more intuitive to read?
> 
> Aside from that, this is great. It has a slow pace but the changes of pitch and rhythm are very well paced so that it doesn't become predictably repetitive.


Thanks! I agree with both of your points. The soprano part does seem a bit taxing, but maybe not as much as it sounds on the recording. In the recording it sounds like they're singing super long drones, but really it's supposed to be more articulated and rhythmic with quick breaths. I always have trouble with spelling accidentals, especially with cluster chords, and especially with different cluster chords in the same measure. Do you have any ideas?

Also, for some reason the recording I posted was in the wrong tempo. It's supposed to be a bit faster. It doesn't sound as good in the mistaken slower tempo, so here's a link with the real tempo and also new dynamic markings: https://drive.google.com/file/d/125B7J-N-3HCb_3uxKasPJaBsqDqy6SzM/view?usp=sharing


----------



## Fredx2098

I may have mentioned a piece for xylophone and two gongs that I was working on at school. I just got the notebook back and made a recording of what I have so far using practice bells and cymbals because those are the closest things I have, but it gets the point across: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qBvIQJYw0pMyeSusGVRuHEkkMRmpxW1V/view?usp=sharing

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/1y4cF76XQC3SJQCjGrWOuyHHGmp-d5cNT/view?usp=sharing


----------



## aleazk

Fredx2098 said:


> Thanks! I agree with both of your points. The soprano part does seem a bit taxing, but maybe not as much as it sounds on the recording. In the recording it sounds like they're singing super long drones, but really it's supposed to be more articulated and rhythmic with quick breaths. I always have trouble with spelling accidentals, especially with cluster chords, and especially with different cluster chords in the same measure. Do you have any ideas?
> 
> Also, for some reason the recording I posted was in the wrong tempo. It's supposed to be a bit faster. It doesn't sound as good in the mistaken slower tempo, so here's a link with the real tempo and also new dynamic markings: https://drive.google.com/file/d/125B7J-N-3HCb_3uxKasPJaBsqDqy6SzM/view?usp=sharing


I found it nice. I agree with the issue of the breathe space for the soprano part. I didn't listen to the slower version, but I thought, indeed, that could be better if it were slower. Keep working, I will be listening, too!


----------



## Fredx2098

aleazk said:


> I found it nice. I agree with the issue of the breathe space for the soprano part. I didn't listen to the slower version, but I thought, indeed, that could be better if it were slower. Keep working, I will be listening, too!


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!


----------



## Fredx2098

Do you think breath marks would be a sufficient amendment or should I change some note lengths altogether?


----------



## aleazk

Fredx2098 said:


> 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!


----------



## Vasks

Fredx2098 said:


> 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/1qBvIQJYw0pMyeSusGVRuHEkkMRmpxW1V/view?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



Fredx2098 said:


> 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/1y4cF76XQC3SJQCjGrWOuyHHGmp-d5cNT/view?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.


----------



## Fredx2098

aleazk said:


> 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!


----------



## Fredx2098

Vasks said:


> 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.



Vasks said:


> 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!


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Fredx2098 said:


> 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.
> 
> 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!


I highly suggest you go about standard notation. Nothing confuses/annoys percussionists more than unorthodox notation. Take it from a percussionist.


----------



## Fredx2098

E Cristobal Poveda said:


> I highly suggest you go about standard notation. Nothing confuses/annoys percussionists more than unorthodox notation. Take it from a percussionist.


I'm also a percussionist. I've played pieces with non-standard notation, and it annoyed me for about 2 minutes. They were all less intuitive than my notation. Did you look at it? If I used standard notation, there would be about a full sentence per measure of gong sections saying where to hit and what to hit it with. That would annoy me more, personally.


----------



## Vasks

Fredx2098 said:


> If I used standard notation, there would be about a full sentence per measure of gong sections saying where to hit and what to hit it with.


Actually it wouldn't. In a day or two, I can post what I believe is a clean and simple way; unless you don't want me to.


----------



## E Cristobal Poveda

Fredx2098 said:


> I'm also a percussionist. I've played pieces with non-standard notation, and it annoyed me for about 2 minutes. They were all less intuitive than my notation. Did you look at it? If I used standard notation, there would be about a full sentence per measure of gong sections saying where to hit and what to hit it with. That would annoy me more, personally.


I did, and it confused and annoyed me. That's why I left the comment


----------



## Fredx2098

Vasks said:


> Actually it wouldn't. In a day or two, I can post what I believe is a clean and simple way; unless you don't want me to.


Sure, that would be cool if you feel like it. Could you describe your idea?


----------



## Vasks

While I did a two line staff of just the gongs, if you keep your five line staff, you should have the large gong on the bottom space and the small gong on the top space.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kkxrq4mcxz76b6k/Xylo & 2 Gongs .pdf?dl=0


----------



## Fredx2098

Vasks said:


> While I did a two line staff of just the gongs, if you keep your five line staff, you should have the large gong on the bottom space and the small gong on the top space.
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/kkxrq4mcxz76b6k/Xylo & 2 Gongs .pdf?dl=0


That works for what I have so far, but it looks like the measures would have to be pretty wide to fit all the text, and I haven't even written anything faster than a quarter note yet. It seems like it would be only marginally less annoying for a percussionist looking at it for the first time. My notation seems about as annoying as drum set notation.


----------



## Fredx2098

I've begun working on the first real song of the O'Hara song cycle (which I've decided to call Piano, Clarinet, and Voice as a whole). What I have so far is an introduction with only the piano and clarinet. I called the section "Alma" because I thought I would use that poem for it, but I developed a technique of paraphrasing his poems to make it more rhythmic than his typical abstract prosaic tone, so it may be called "Music" instead, based on my paraphrase of that poem.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wmxTv5SA_MIcIByL5NN5NhDQtLHUyM45/view?usp=sharing


----------



## Fredx2098

Here it is all together: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LG_F6zeGul0FTanqgYH8UXrUdZ-rVNqr/view?usp=sharing

I think it transitions nicely, but I'm sure a lot of people just won't like my style.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Fredx2098 said:


> Here it is all together: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LG_F6zeGul0FTanqgYH8UXrUdZ-rVNqr/view?usp=sharing
> 
> I think it transitions nicely, but I'm sure a lot of people just won't like my style.


I like the first part to about a minute. But the small Feldmanian changes after feels static to me, but then I feel that about much of his music.


----------



## Fredx2098

Phil loves classical said:


> I like the first part to about a minute. But the small Feldmanian changes after feels static to me, but then I feel that about much of his music.


Naturally! I suppose my music taste is about the opposite of most people's, but I also enjoy and appreciate most styles, which is perhaps opposite as well. I'm glad if you were interested for even a moment.


----------



## IpadComposer

Hi Fred. I will not comment on the music you have written, but, for sure, the piano you are playing leaves a lot to be desired. We "conversed" on another thread re iOS music production. You can lift your music substantially for your own enjoyment with an affordable iPad setup. There are very expressive, affordable iOS pianos. Here is a recording I did on a crummy Casio keyboard. I did not even have a sustain pedal with me when I made this. I have played my Steinway B for thirty of the fifty years I have been making music. While not perfect, the Ravenscroft275 piano ($36) is a marvelous, expressive instrument. Again, I am not using a sustain pedal, with one the string resonances are all there. Though they might say otherwise, many people would believe they are listening to an acoustic instrument. I know I would. Happy to give you all the details if you like.

__
https://soundcloud.com/michael-levy-387395070%2Fyardbird-suite-1


----------



## Fredx2098

IpadComposer said:


> Hi Fred. I will not comment on the music you have written, but, for sure, the piano you are playing leaves a lot to be desired. We "conversed" on another thread re iOS music production. You can lift your music substantially for your own enjoyment with an affordable iPad setup. There are very expressive, affordable iOS pianos. Here is a recording I did on a crummy Casio keyboard. I did not even have a sustain pedal with me when I made this. I have played my Steinway B for thirty of the fifty years I have been making music. While not perfect, the Ravenscroft275 piano ($36) is a marvelous, expressive instrument. Again, I am not using a sustain pedal, with one the string resonances are all there. Though they might say otherwise, many people would believe they are listening to an acoustic instrument. I know I would. Happy to give you all the details if you like.
> 
> __
> https://soundcloud.com/michael-levy-387395070%2Fyardbird-suite-1


That does sound great! I guess you're referring to the Nocturnes, which aren't really _my_ style. I can write tonal music in my head or with a digital piano, but the sounds I _want_ to make focus on the sustained intermingling acoustic resonance of instruments, and I feel mentally blocked unless I'm using a real piano. It's good to know that there are nice sounding digital instruments out there. Was the bass digital as well? One major problem is that I really can't stand Apple hardware or software. I've been looking for decent digital instruments, but really without acoustic instruments it's not going to sound how I want it to sound, and I won't know how it will really sound. I have a pretty nice digital piano. There's a stark difference in how freely creative I can be with a real piano and without.


----------



## IpadComposer

Thanks for listening, Fred. I am glad you could hear it is a very good quality virtual instrument. As I mentioned, I had no sustain pedal with me so the string resonances the app provides were not present. And yes, it is a virtual bass that I played on my Casio (cost $15). The piano cost $36.
I make a distinction between digital pianos and virtual pianos tho they are both software based. With a virtual instrument you can have a simulacrum of a Steinway, Bechstein, Bosendorfer and many others like the Ravenscroft I mentioned. A digital piano, no matter what the price tag, does not let you sample the variety onboard ( though you could use your digital as a midi controller to play thru an iPad. You would have to overcome your objections to Apple. For many in the iOS world it is also a love hate relationship. They admire the technical innovation but don't like the world's biggest corporation's policies and attention to what is really a super small niche market. Not that you are asking my advice but I still counsel you to investigate. A used ipad4 with 32 gab ROm would cost you about $150. You would need an Apple camera connection kit ($50 and worth it) and the two virtual pianos I use less than $100. You can check the AppStore for details on the Ravenscroft RC 275 and the Colossus grand by Crudebyte. Recording options are as inexpensive as $10 and you would record directly from your keyboard to the iPad. Perhaps I have stirred your curiosity. In any case I wish you happy composing and playing,


----------



## Fredx2098

I was inspired to start composing a piano piece, which usually doesn't happen with my digital piano. I have essentially the first "theme" done and a bit of the next one, but here I recorded just the complete first theme. The recording is awful: a phone recording of a digital piano, but at least its a real human playing the music. I'm not a good piano player. My performance is not exactly how it's supposed to sound, but it's close enough.

If you don't like Feldman, you will certainly not like this!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eF_7c7czoEx5P7r4lGQZ72lFRQp1cPhd/view?usp=sharing


----------



## eugeneonagain

I actually think it's quite good as a structure, but is hitting the semitone: e-f a 'theme'.


----------



## Fredx2098

eugeneonagain said:


> I actually think it's quite good as a structure, but is hitting the semitone: e-f a 'theme'.


Thank you! And perhaps it is a bit of a sparse theme, but there's also a major second A and B in there. I only used those 4 notes and I though it sounded interesting. More to come though, with more notes.


----------



## Guest

This is very nice. I guess it will expand into a longer work? Something you may want to consider is avoiding octave transposition of the main 'theme' to give the piece a very slow but continuous feel of transformation. Perhaps you could formulate your own logic or set of rules for how the semitone can be transposed across different octaves, still retaining the same quality and interval, but avoiding the establishment of the semitone as equivalent to a 'tonic' function. The piece would have the potential to sound even more expansive through sparser occurrences of sound, constantly having the need to _go somewhere else_ but constantly lingering on unresolved sonorities, something you might be interested in, I think.

I really really liked the sense of anticipation around 35 seconds in where the duration between each attack is longer than expected.


----------



## Fredx2098

shirime said:


> This is very nice. I guess it will expand into a longer work?


Thanks! Yes, what I posted was just the first section. I'm about to post a recording of two sections completed. At this rate the finished product might be around 10 minutes long.



> Something you may want to consider is avoiding octave transposition of the main 'theme' to give the piece a very slow but continuous feel of transformation. Perhaps you could formulate your own logic or set of rules for how the semitone can be transposed across different octaves, still retaining the same quality and interval, but avoiding the establishment of the semitone as equivalent to a 'tonic' function. The piece would have the potential to sound even more expansive through sparser occurrences of sound, constantly having the need to _go somewhere else_ but constantly lingering on unresolved sonorities, something you might be interested in, I think.


Are you talking about the very beginning where I just play the same semitone in two octaves? I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting. Using different notes each time rather than repeating some and making it feel like a tonic? I'm not opposed to having a tonic (I don't think Feldman was either, of course I have to mention him). I don't want to make 12-tone serial type music as my "serious" music. I like chromatic music where the key is relatively a mystery, has shifting amounts of consonance and dissonance, and may have something that sounds like a root note. I might be missing your point, so if you can elaborate that would be nice.



> I really really liked the sense of anticipation around 35 seconds in where the duration between each attack is longer than expected.


Thanks, to create that effect I use notes of defined length that are each different lengths, each with another note with a fermata after it, creating a free/open/mysterious type atmosphere.

I did a better job playing the piece this time, so the rhythms are more accurate to how it should be.


----------



## Fredx2098

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nChgY8SY6sjh5uy365_burSY3_KbbAkV/view?usp=sharing

Here's the new recording with the second part as well. I'm gonna try to upload the sheet music too. Still not sure what to call this.


----------



## aleazk

The pacing and the placing of the musical events is very well done, you put them at the right moment. Here they advance and develop a bit faster than in a Feldman piece, but if you plan a duration of 10 mins for the piece, then it seems the right pace. Many people don't have a good ear for that, which to me is essential in a piece. I also was a bit surprised with the harmony in the second section, which seems more tonalish, modalish or whatever, since that seems a departure from Feldman, but that's good, shows you can reveal against your idol. I would suggest, though, to add just a bit more of dissonance to those harmonies, otherwise the texture becomes too clean and the mystery dissipates a bit.


----------



## Fredx2098

aleazk said:


> The pacing and the placing of the musical events is very well done, you put them at the right moment. Here they advance and develop a bit faster than in a Feldman piece, but if you plan a duration of 10 mins for the piece, then it seems the right pace. Many people don't have a good ear for that, which to me is essential in a piece. I also was a bit surprised with the harmony in the second section, which seems more tonalish, modalish or whatever, since that seems a departure from Feldman, but that's good, shows you can reveal against your idol. I would suggest, though, to add just a bit more of dissonance to those harmonies, otherwise the texture becomes too clean and the mystery dissipates a bit.


Thank you! I think with solo piano there has to be a minimum pace so the notes don't fully fade away. With different pianos it could even be played differently depending on the qualities of the instrument, which is what I want my music to focus on (can't wait to get my own real piano, soon I think). I don't want to be a copycat, I just want to use those qualities Feldman uses that I think should be used more often. I personally enjoy those few bars of melody in the middle of the second section, but now that I'm listening and re-listening, I don't like the "end". Definitely way too tonal, it's nearly a traditional cadence, and the A minor chord really solidifies a root note. It should probably be different anyways to go into the next section. Can't have anything that sounds like a separate "movement" or something. That's one Feldman thing I have to stick with.


----------



## Fredx2098

https://drive.google.com/file/d/17otPY3A2SUpVTpfyPmNi4grN6J4ch5WB/view?usp=sharing

Here's the sheet music so far. Maybe I'll call it Piano Piece, at least for now.


----------



## aleazk

Fredx2098 said:


> Thank you! I think with solo piano there has to be a minimum pace so the notes don't fully fade away. With different pianos it could even be played differently depending on the qualities of the instrument, which is what I want my music to focus on (can't wait to get my own real piano, soon I think). I don't want to be a copycat, I just want to use those qualities Feldman uses that I think should be used more often. I personally enjoy those few bars of melody in the middle of the second section, but now that I'm listening and re-listening, I don't like the "end". Definitely way too tonal, it's nearly a traditional cadence, and the A minor chord really solidifies a root note. It should probably be different anyways to go into the next section. Can't have anything that sounds like a separate "movement" or something. That's one Feldman thing I have to stick with.


About the end and the tonal cadence, yes, that's exactly what I noticed, the resolution is too strong and dissipates too much of the tension. On the other hand, you can indeed have some local tonal centers, but you must cloud them a bit, before, during, and after the cadence-like moment. Check Barraqué's piano sonata, the section after the introduction, it has some very clear local tonal centers.


----------



## Fredx2098

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oq_b2ac0oal0MhSeMO16M1r6X14U2p-g/view?usp=drivesdk

I expanded the piece a bit, reworked it (no more gross pure tonal consonance, I think), and now it sounds like a full coherent piece of music, maybe. I'm not sure if I want to keep expanding. Perhaps when I get a real piano. I hate composing with a digital piano.... It makes it a challenging struggle rather than just art flowing out of my brain.


----------



## Fredx2098

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o_GIf0LAy8A4uQ_BBt4uASyONvyf0UvU/view?usp=sharing

I wrote some more for piano. I might add it to the other piano piece I was/am working on. This one's a bit more interesting with the notes used I think, not just white keys.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WVKf-2Q8GB7xI4b4arBGmuOLOgayxHEv/view?usp=sharing

Here's a link to the whole thing (so far, almost done (maybe)) mixed together. I think what I wrote today flows nicely after what I had before.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1M2_U2sUjnKy5uZTQickiyi0jcZLUb6kC/view?usp=drivesdk

Here's my handwritten sheet music. Too lazy to put it in software. One page down. The last line is what I wrote today.


----------

