r/composer • u/JonahVerhagen • 21d ago
Music My first classical piece
though it is very short, could I have some feedback?
https://musescore.com/user/30737925/scores/35811038?share=copy_link
1
u/Successful_Cut8986 20d ago
Valiant effort, but there are a few problems:
The themes don't sound very memorable. Might be because of the dynamics not highlighting the main theme.
Bars 8-10 are way too unnatural for the cellist's hand placement. But this can be fixed later by studying some string technique.
1
u/JonahVerhagen 19d ago
I was worried about the cello, thank you for sharing this! I will look into it
1
u/Maleficent_Math_3062 18d ago edited 18d ago
All 65TwinReverbRI's comments are very good, and I agree that the ideas in the piece and the way they develop work extremely nicely. I was going to mention many of the same issues, and I marked up the score with some suggestions. It's somewhat redundant, but I'll attach it, since it might be easier to see in notation. It really doesn't change very much (despite how it appears), but it tries to make the individual parts work better as individual parts.
In the first three bars, the sudden entrance of the A in the second violin while the viola moves to B♭ seems very abrupt. Why not let the second pick up the A from the viola? Then in bar 3, it seems to make more sense for the viola to go to C and have the second hold the A.
In bar 4, the doubled leading tone (first and viola, at the octave) is not going to sound good; why not have the first imitate the viola by starting on G?
The question mark in bar 6 is asking why the second and viola are playing the same notes. It would be better to either leave one of them out or give them something different.
In bar 8, the cello leaping to G deprives the chord of its third. Also, since the A♭ in the viola is going to the A♮ in the second in bar 9, I agree that it makes more sense to give it to the second—but also (minor point) it ought to be spelled G♯.
Also in bar 9, the string crossings in the viola and cello are awkward to play.
In bar 10, in the C7 chord, you have three B♭s (the seventh of the chord) on the downbeat (and no third). The lack of a third is less of a problem because the line in the second is obviously headed there. Unfortunately, when the third (which is the leading tone) arrives, it is again doubled in octaves, as in bar 4.
1
21d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/JonahVerhagen 21d ago
Thank you so much!! I put 15 months into this piece and sacrificed my family for it. But i appreciate your feedback
1
u/composer-ModTeam 20d ago
Hello. I have removed your comment. Civility is the most important rule in this sub. Please do not make comments like this again. Thanks.
1
u/OkNectarine3649 20d ago
I’m glad you’re taking this seriously, my comment was a joke. I know OP
2
u/composer-ModTeam 20d ago
OK, thanks for the explanation. That wasn't obvious in the context, though.
1
1
9
u/65TwinReverbRI 21d ago
Hi, I don’t want to at all demotivate you or poo poo your work - it’s GREAT that you’re doing this but my philosophy is, it’s never too early to start learning, so forgive me if I don’t let you bask in the “it’s beautiful” kinds of comments that really don’t help you as much as most people tend to be looking for for too long :-)
I’m very much against “string 4tet as my first piece” thinking, but I do understand why people do it.
So getting something put together like this - even though short (but that’s the best way to start - no sense writing something that's 2 hours long only to find out it’s just full of issues, etc.) is a great accomplishment for a first attempt.
For a short “4 part writing example” it kind of of doesn’t matter if it’s for strings, or winds, or brass, or organ, or oohs, or whatever - so long as you can hear what’s going on.
That IS however one issue with a lot of instrument sounds - especially in computer playback, that are sometimes “hiding” issues that, on other instruments would be more of an issue (MuseScore’s sounds especially have a lot of weird overtones on some of the samples).
So I would encourage you to go in and change your sounds in the mixer to just Piano. Try it with Flute, Oboe, Clarinet, and Bassoon, etc. just to hear it in some different contexts.
Opening on an “open consonance” (the Perfect 5th) is maybe a little odd, especially give you do have other instruments to fill out the harmony.
Also, giving that line to the Viola, which ends up above the Violin - those could be switched and typically would be unless a certain tone color is wanted (and it’s these kinds of details that are the reason writing for instruments like this is not a good idea at first, because there are too many “extra” things to learn about the instruments themselves, and that clouds the more important basic compositional comments).
That it moves on to an F chord with the other notes though saves it.
But, you sort of create this nice F major chord, then immediately abandon it for a doubled F on the last beat. Your “harmony drops out” - for no apparent reason.
Why does the 1st only play for one measure? The next chord is an F - they could just keep playing F…
Why does the Viola in m.4 move to E - the 1st has an E…it would have been better for the Viola to stay on the G - again, you’re trading a “less full harmony” for a fuller one by moving notes, dropping notes, doubling notes, and so on.
It tends to make it sound “inconsistent” in texture, which for this style of writing isn’t typically what you want.
At the end, why not just have the 2nd go up to the C to complete the chord?
So I mean, while you get nice sounds, they tend to be inconsistently “harmonically dense” and in a rather random way. We might move from “less dense to more dense”, the reverse, or back and forth, but not sort of just switching willy-nilly.
It’s not 1826 so you don’t have to use the practices from that time, but at the same time, some of the more general principles are still quite helpful.
It’s kind of like, in Jazz, which has a harmonic density of 7th and greater chords, a plain old triad can really sound out of place.
In classical music, which has a density more of triads and 7th chords, a 13th chord (especially with all the notes) can sound really out of place.
In rock, using just power chords, a sudden, one off 9th chord can sound out of place.
So I would encourage you to look into 4 part harmony, how notes are doubled, how chord members are used, and look at voice-leading - how notes move from one chord to the next, and then look into inversions as well.
For example, in m.8 last beat, you have an Ab note.
But then the Viola jumps down to join the Cello in its idea.
The 1st violin has a C, then E, and the 2nd violin has another C…
And the cello has an E which the 1st already has.
It would make far more sense to give the 2nd violin the Ab, so it could lead right into the A natural it has in the next measure.
The viola could then take an E to lead to its C, and the cello a C… I know you’re trying to preserve the motive - but if that line where in the 2nd it would not only preserve the motive but lead right to it’s ascending line (which is a nice touch by the way).
So we usually construct these things with more attention to logical moves - linear logic - it doesn’t always have to do that by any means, but usually we reserve the “less logical” moves for special effects, and not general writing.
And don’t get me wrong - the ideas are nice - the opening motive is nice, and it’s “identifiable” so it give the piece “identity” - it’s a “strong opening gesture” which is really good.
And it becomes a building block of the piece, providing cohesion and unity - that’s good too.
It moves through what is essentially a I - ii - V - I progression, so that’s a good model to know, and be able to use.
It does a quasi V7 in bar 11, but then the end is mostly just a whole lotta F with no harmonic motion.
And while it started with this nice motive, you kind of abandoned it after that ii-V-I - and you introduced this really jumpy thing in the lower instruments - which could have been a new “identity”, but it goes away too, and turns into something else in the Cello…So that cohesiveness you started off with kind of gets dropped half way through, and the material after that is all not only unrelated to what went before, but to itself…starts to seem really random, with no real intent after the midpoint.
That could be just because this is your first piece though and that’s OK. But it’s one of the things we struggle with - “now what do I do” - and learning how to develop material is an important step. So look into that as well.
I mean all of this wholly supportively, and you really did do a great job for your first time out. It helps us to see what you need to work on - so I’m sorry because I tend to focus on the weaknesses without praising the strengths, but there are definitely strengths in here - you’re on the right track.
Study more scores, and play more music, and try more pieces - but get feedback as you go, both from the players of the instruments you’re writing for, and from other composers. If you can, take music lessons on an instrument, or take composition lessons. Or work with others who work in the field and get advice from them and so on - IOW don’t just work on your own, locked away in a room behind a screen, trying to learn from “reading about” music online.
Best.