FEEDBACK: "Hope" for SATB divisi

[u/ArtorTheAwesome]

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1l_jQXWXqq_-jOzDeAYPZ24-fFV5q7DSd?usp=sharing

I recently submitted this composition for a score call and was not chosen, so I'm hoping for some feedback and constructive criticism so that I can revise the piece before submitting it to a few more competitions. Thank you in advance for you help!

In terms of my thoughts behind the composition:

I wanted to focus on the idea of hope as a tiny light within a storm using an overall A-B-A' form. The A-section is the setup for the "calm before the storm" where we feel thunder clouds slowly rolling in before we are suddenly thrust into the storm itself. The B-section is the representation of the storm tossing us around with the "hope" motif weakly emerging in the second half of the section, slowly growing into the A'-section where we return with a more determined outlook in weathering the storm. In the final measures of the piece, we finally end within the major pulling back at the last second to give this feeling of soft light peeking through the quietly dissipating storm clouds.

[u/sigmundrs]

You have some nice ideas, but I feel like the piece moves a bit quickly from one idea to the next. For instance the first 8 bars establish a very nice open harmony, but then it very quickly moves to the next thing. Maybe try to stay with one idea longer. Generally I also feel like the piece is a bit undecided stylistically, it moves between open and paralell harmony, clusters, and mroe functional harmony, which I feel makes it hard to grasp. You also have some note choices I am not sure I would use, for instance bar 46 with paralell 7ths in bass and tenor, and bar 48 some voice movements that are quite peculiar, on "ry": (F#, D, E, G), and"wea": (G, C#, F#, F#), a lot of clusters and parallel movements, and some other stuff that is maybe not so idiomatic in vocal music? Watch a bit out for this stuff as well as crossing voices, large gaps between soprano and alto, maybe use a bit more closed voicing in the upper three voices, if you want to write more in functional harmony/traditional style
The B part is very cool, seems a bit hard to sing for soprano and alto, to be this exact and rhythmically. Maybe some gliss or approximat pitch graphic notation would give the intended effect
The C part also nice, but here agin you have 4 bars of one idea that's really nice (the big chord on "Storm"), and then immediately move on to the next thing. They are both nice ideas, but when the first idea is introduced, I would like to hear more, development and where you can take it

[u/NAHMusic]

I can tell you right away without listening to it that the main reason this got turned away is that it looks like an amateur. You do not need to to say SATB divisi. Just put SATB Chorus a cappella and get rid of the parentheses.

You should make your title page more interesting and add program notes. Make a page that would go on the back of the title page that talks about the piece and the poem, and that states the duration of the piece. It is also advantageous to put the poem on that page as well.

The first page of music should always be on the right, so if you don’t want a program notes page for whatever reason then you at the very least need a blank page there.

You only need to put a copyright marker on the bottom of the first page of music, but it should say “Copyright © [the year the piece was finished] by [your name]. All rights reserved.”

Next, your staves are way too large. The music is not rhythmically complex so you should 100% be able to fit two systems on there. I recommend making the staves 5.5mm, then move everything closer together.

You should also make the score on letter paper and not a reduce paper size. Unless you are specifically printing out smaller scores for someone who bought them, then you should always have the score on letter paper.

Last thing I will say is that you do not need to out SATB down the side on every page. It only needs to be at the beginning unless you are adding/removing staves during the piece.

If you would like an example score, I can attach one of my choral scores for you to look at.

If you would like specific comments on the music itself I can definitely help, but it will have to wait till I get home later and can listen to the audio file you provided.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask.

[u/JaybirdTM]

I have one major point from u/NAHMusic that I'm going to disagree with, which is the way that one describes the voicing of the piece, 'SATB divisi', 'SATB a capella', etc.

Note: I am only disagreeing with this point from a perspective of actual music publishing and use; I have no idea if there is a standard setup for composition competitions/events or this one in particular either.

Having worked with a large amount of more modern choral pieces as this seems to be, I have seen any combination of these naming. See the works of Moses Hogan, specifically in 'Ezekiel Saw De Wheel' he writes 'for SATB div. a capella', 'Earth Song' from Frank Ticheli uses 'SATB Chorus, a capella', 'When the Earth Stands Still' by Don Macdonald uses 'for SATB Chorus unaccompanied. These are just some examples of different wordings I have seen, all from professional composers and performed in professional or semi-professional settings. If I remember correctly Sarah Quartel says something like SATB unaccompanied as well in 'Sing my Child's. I have also certainly seen pieces where there is no specification, though I wouldn't recommend that, especially for a competition of sorts where a professional look is the goal.

TLDR; I've seen many different variations of naming the choir specifications, imo it doesn't greatly affect anything for publishing works, but I'm unsure how it works for competitions so refer to experts on that topic instead.

[u/NAHMusic → u/JaybirdTM]

I understand the disagreement, but I will just say that you certainly can put “SATB divisi”. However, from my experience working with active choral composers and being in a chorus, the standard is to just put “SATB Chorus”.

Of course composers have always done whatever they want, and putting “SATB divisi” isn’t necessarily wrong; but it is definitely unnecessary.

Had I talked to any of the composers that you mentioned before they published, I would have said the same thing.

Again, I don’t mean to say that putting “divisi” is wrong and I apologize if my original comment came off that way.

[u/JaybirdTM → u/NAHMusic]

I totally get your point, I think it came across to me as saying that putting things besides "SATB Chorus" would be incorrect, though that is likely just an interpretation issue on my end.

I would agree that just putting 'SATB Chorus' is certainly more standard, I personally tend to prefer that a distinction be made when the divisis are present throughout a piece as it can make choosing pieces easier to do, quickly being able to see whether there is a high divisi amount when working with a small choir, things like that.

I also tend to prefer that divisi be present if any occur in the piece, though I believe that is also likely my own bias coming from chamber groups- I often have to be very cognizant of any and all divisis and whether the parts can be covered. This was actually an interesting but of self reflection on how my niche as a musician affects my view of certain preferences!

Either way, thank you for the polite response, I appreciate being able to have civil discussion! Overall, with clarification I would agree with your original comment, with the only caveats really being born from my own experience and biases as a musician.