Requesting feedback

[drb967]

I am "new" to this site, but would like to request some feedback for some of my compostions that I finally have managed to post.
Symphony #1 ; Symphony #2 (both use Beethoven's 5th instrumentation with a few more common exception made (ie 2 tenor/ 1 bass trombone - and expanded percussion- mallets and other "now common" percussive instruments)
Piano Sonata for 4 hands (2 players at one piano)

Posted at http://www.soundclick.com/bands/page...?bandID=719297

All are tonal in nature, and will advise the playback is from Finale '07 (so if you know the program you know some of the instruments aren't quite "ideal" yet.

Would also ask advice from Finale 07 users (recent upgrade from 02) for the intrument settings in "studio view" as far as balancing for a more realistic playback if you have any suggested set points. In previous versions I had simply went the long road and created different dynamics for the instruments to get a more correct playback.

Thanks in advance for any feed back
D Rodney Bishop
rodneybishop967@hotmail.com

[reith]

Can you let us know the timing/duration of the movements so we can try to fit some time in? Thanks.

cheers,
reith

[drb967]

Sorry about that I thought the link listed the times
Meditation for Piano - 5:16
Piano Sonata mvt 1 5:30
Piano Sonata mvt 2 7:29
Piano Sonata mvt 3 5:10
Symphony 1 mvt 1 : 12 :44
Symphony 1 mvts 2,3,4 16:36
Symphony 2 mvt 1 5:06
Symphony 2 mvt 2 5:44
Symphony 2 mvt 3 6:45
Symphony 3 mvt 4 3:44

[drb967]

I've noticed that some have posted pdf files here along with the links, if interested I can add those- to assist with isolating which instruments are being used. I hadnt thought of that before. I am still updating to 07 several other comps to be shared.
Reith, I appreciate the offer and the time to review these, but note I do not expect a review of each one by only one person, maybe a couple of comments on one or two for now- I hope you will enjoy the others at some point though- just as a listen through.

I appreciate any feedback though- and this forum is much appreciated, I am sure by all.

[Stenir]

Please add PDFs if you can. Some of us don't get much chance to view stuff like this unless we are at work or the such. I personally can't get into soundclick at work. But PDFs would be great.

[drb967]

Seems I am at my maximum for uploads currently- if you could specify which you might be more interested in (other than what is posted) I can delete a few an load some others.

[Stenir]

A couple of things from Meditation for Piano:

1.) In measures 15, you have a dotted quarter, eighth, eighth, doutted quarter rhythm, but the file plays it as dotted quarter, eighth, two quarters. Which are you prefering to be correct?

2.) I wonder, as I listen right now, what this may sound like as a Saxophone quartet....Hmm.

3.) Measure 82 has the same problem as #1. The 16th note run is upwards, as in measures 83, as opposed to what is in the score.

4.) And finally, the second to last measure reads different from the file. The file plays the B on beat 3 and a C on beat 4 as in measures 97.

Other than that, I LOVE it. I'm gonna go home and try it out on my piano. I'll spend some time listening to the others and let you know what I think, k?

[drb967]

The written file is correct with the exception of the next to last measure; it should mirror measure 97.

Might work for saxophones- never thought of it that way; I also have a friend looking at it for guitar- which seems to be nice also.

Thanks for your time, listening and replying.

[Stenir]

I'll say this about Meditation: it's really easy (I can play it on the piano and I have had no formal training) and I LOVED to play it.

Although I was just playing how the pdf file had it, so I know there was a few places different from the soundclick file.

Good job.

[stevel]

Originally Posted by drb967

Seems I am at my maximum for uploads currently- if you could specify which you might be more interested in (other than what is posted) I can delete a few an load some others.

Rodney, a couple of remarks about the notation for the Meditation:

Dude - what are you crazy? I'd never put 1967 - for my dates for fear that leaving the death date blank would somehow come back on me and I'd get hit by a bus tomorrow! Actually, I just put the completion date there but I'm just being silly here. On to the serious stuff:

The Left Hand pattern is not usually written out like you have here - though what you have is specific, usually it's acceptable to just write 8th, 8th, long note - with the pedal marking. It's a little busy the way you have it here (though this often happens to people when using Finale and the like because you have to notate it the "irregular" way to get it to play correctly!) - the other solution is to make them separate voices - in m. 1 for example: A whole, E 8th tied to dotted half, then A dotted half from top to bottom. Both of these are more common than what you have here, so you may want to look at a couple of other scores with this type of accompaniment and see how they handle it.

Your phrase marks in 6 and 7 seem a bit funky to me. I wonder if it might not be better to either move the LH notes to the RH staff (as cross staff notation, not making the RH play them) to make it a little more obvious how the two hands continue the line. Or, if you choose to use the separate voice solution for what I said above, this would make those notes have a separate stem from the other accomp notes which would also make the line, and the phrasing clearer.

In m. 25 your slur is under the notes. While it properly belongs there usually, in piano music the slurs often go over whether they should or not just to avoid making the area between the staves too cluttered. Everything you have (including what "should" be slurred under in m. 30-32) is over, so even if it's just for consistency's sake, you should probably have it (25 - and the two notes in 28) slurred over. At least try it and see what you think.

I like what you did in 30 with the parentheses around the A (and later examples). I've always hated when people aske you to play the same not you're already playing! - But this is a good solution to show the continuation of the line. I wonder if something similar might work in the previous sections I mentioned as well - it would make it more consistent and clear.

m. 58. Linger? Hmmm. What about a fermata? Or what about even changing the meter to 5/4? I'm really more confused by the fact that the "*" is so far away from the word linger. I'd almost rather see "linger*", or a fermata with an asterisk. I just did something similar in one of my pieces but I put an asterisk, and then "(see performance note)" so there's something really obvious in the score telling the person to look for it. I'm afraid the asterisk might eventually get photocopied into a smudge or blob, and it might be hard to figure out what's going on. I think "linger" is OK, but I think either the asterisk should be on the word, or, you should have some extra statement (on the first appearance) to tell them to look somewhere. Alternatively, you could just explain it in a performance note on one of the blank pages of the score (inside front or back cover, etc.) and just put "linger" by itself in the music. But of course, there's always the jokers who don't read the "preface" to a book, and the performers who don't check for performance notes!

The final note - you've got a fermata - you don't usually need "let ring". Most of the time, Let Ring (or more commonly, "l.v." for "lesser vibrere" or, let vibrate) is used for a note that is struck for a short value, but allowed to continue to sound for, usually as long as possible (or practical). It may be clearer (depending on what you actually want) to include a new pedal marking for that note, and ditch the fermata.

One final observation: all the way through you've got syncopated patterns that you've used the traditional shortcut. For example, instead of 8th 8th-tied-to-8th 8th, you've got 8th 1/4 8th - which is of course totally acceptable. But starting in m.80 the lower part in the RH - the D starting on the upbeat looks a little funky. I'm wondering if it won't be clearer if you either break it up into tied 8ths, or, make the C it goes to stemmed down. I know what you have are all "allowable" shortcuts, but it just strikes me as a little funky.

I guess what I mean is, I'm not crazy about anything in a score that I have to think too much about - after all, when you're busy playing you don't really have time to stop and figure out something funky - so I try to make everything as clear as possible (with the exception of those performance notes, which I do expect performers to read!). Obviously, after you've read through something once, you'll know it's coming - but things like this m. 80 - sometimes they'll catch you off guard even on the second or third playing - or worse, once you learn it, if you look too closely at it it can trip you up!

So, I'm not trying to bash your work here - everything is "legal" so to speak. I'm just wondering if there aren't some ways to tidy it up a bit. So if you feel like it, try some alternate solutions (it's easy enough to make a duplicate version and flip slurs and stuff in Finale and trash it if you don't like it) and see what you think works best.

Best,
Steve