Yeah, I'm new hear, but any way...

This one is called "Of Great Passion"

I hope you enjoy.

Hmm... The melodic ideas were rather interesting, however, the orchestration seems to be the biggest problem here. You treat your ensemble as if it was a piano, where chords can be played close together (thirds are considered to be fairly close in the bass octave). And you never indicated much techniques of playing (divisi for parts impossible for the celli). You also lack dynamic markings to show which instruments were the important part. Doublings were a major major issue here; flutes against trumpets, violins against flutes, and etc... It seems like you just wanted a louder sound instead of carefully choosing which instruments match with which. There seem to also be a lack of rests in this piece. There weren't enough space for the audience to 'breathe' for listening to your piece; it just went on and on. There were also quite a lot of out of range notes for the double bass.

Your counterpoint skill is definitely present, however, your orchestration is quite weak. Not a bad try. And welcome to Ichigo's.

I'm rather new at writing for string instruments, so I don't know the ranges. I am after all, in a concert band, and only know the ranges for wind instruments. And as for the Doublings, I think that a flute against a violin is generally a good thing. And as for it going on and on, that was the effect I wanted in the piece I wanted it to sound like there were no gaps. And I generally NEVER use dynamics.

This isn't my first song I've wrote either. It is one with the smallest group of instruments.

Here is a long song. For an orchestra with mainly concert band. The violin part at some points may seem...well, Impossible. It is called "The Four Towers" and I was requested to write it as a theme song for another forum. The opening is just a simple majestic theme. The 1st theme, starting at the Andante section, represents wind, or in this songs case, the tower of wind. The second theme, marked Ominious, is the tower of thunder. The very fast theme with the impossible violin part, is the Tower of Lightning. And the final theme, starting at the 5/4 section, is the Sky Tower. Enjoy.

Btw, thank you for the constructive criticism.

I find it somewhat strange the way you put a concert band set up with a string ensemble; if only you had added a bassoon, it would have been a full orchestra with extra band instruments.

~~~

However, as for criticisms, I find this piece -again- have problems with its orchestrations. Various doublings in the piece were fairly unnecessary as different instruments were easy dominating or overwhelming the other one that it's doubling. I am also quite concerned about the no dynamics thing you said. If you don't have dynamics, everything in your music will drown out each other which will turn out as a heavy and bad sound. Dynamic markings doesn't necessarily always mean volume, it can also mean expression; which just reminds me, your pieces had no expression markings either, hence the fact that you should consider including them. Some parts were fairly repetitive too, so you can add some variations to it.

You should consider studying orchestration further, if you want to write for bigger ensembles. Orchestration isn't just fitting in the melody, harmony and etc. with the instruments, it has quite some techniques that you need to know. Furthermore, because you're writing for strings, instruments you're not familiar with, you should really consider studying into that as well.

Your finale file also has some playback problems (only the horns and the trumpets would playback), so you should fix that up. My comments above this persists, however, as I went through your score without listening to the playback.

Oh, Thats because I was doing a sound check with the instrument list. If you were using Notepad, you couldn't fix it. I probably should have checked that first....

It should work now.

As for the repetitive-ness, I am fully aware of that problem...And I am working on fixing that in another song I am currently working on.

This one is called "Of Great Joy."

I've had this one for a while, but i went in an added some dynamics for practice with them. Sir_DotDotDot, I hope the dynamic use in this one is to you liking.

Ok, i usually don't double post like this, but no one replied to the above song so...

I wrote a "theme song" of sorts for my friend Ben. He is a very devout Catholic who procrastinates to an unhealthy level. He told me what he wanted, so I gave him this. There were some things I would do differnetly, but he asked for the specifics. For example, the extreme lack of flute. And the Oboe duet. Well any way, i hope you enjoy.

btw, i would love criticism.

The piece had a fair amount of orchestration problems:

1)Doubling, no TRIPLING all the woodwinds into unison is definitely a bad idea, the reason being that woodwinds are usually poor in intonation when played together.

2)The orchestral bells were WAAAAAY out of range.

3)Percussion and keyboard instruments' staves should be placed between the brass and the strings.

4)Having the horn and the trumpet play in unison is asking the horn to shut up; either give them different parts or don't have the horns play at all. Horns aren't as piercing as trumpets.

5)Where's your first and second violin? One section of violin isn't authentic for an orchestra.

6)Double stops on double basses aren't recommended, so you should take that out.

7)The cello double stop is impossible without a note in between, since the D string is in the way of the G string and the A string.

8)Is that two staved instrument a piano or a harp? You must indicate these stuff clearly.

9) Tie the whole notes in the orchestral bells if you want it to play an equal tremolo.

10) Oboe and clarinet doubling is an orchestrational taboo.

11) Viola doubling an octave below violin doesn't do much except thickening the texture, but since you want it louder there, it's unnecessary.

12) Bar 16, that oboe solo doesn't really correspond with your harmony.

13) You can't expect ONE horn to play your entire horn passage; you need at least two or more, and you must, again, INDICATE CLEARLY.

14) Bar 22, you can't expect a horn to play that fast at that register.

15) Bar 25, octave pizzicato seems unnecessary due to the fact that it's too thick in a confusing way to the audience.

16) Bar 26 has an impossible triple stop for violin, this can be resolved by adding 'div.'.

17) Playing technique markings MUST be placed above the note that requires the technique, not elsewhere (your arco and pizz. markings are like floating randomly).

18) Bar 43, the modulation/change was too random.

19) Again, with the clarinet and doubling at Allegro.

20) Bass at Allegro is too thick due to tuba, contrabassi and celli doublings, this technique is only useful when you want bass to have the melody.

21) Unnecessary doubling with horn/trumpet and woodwinds, it's going to sound harsh the way you voiced it.

22) The timpani did not have clear indications on changing notes; notating timpani requires a lot of indication, study on percussion instruments before notating for it.

23) At Religioso, too much octave doubling was used, it will sound very gray orchestration wise.

24) Bar 64, brass is all in unison, another taboo.

25) Bar 66, oboe run is impossible.

26) Bar 67, oboe passage is even MORE impossible.

27) Clarinet and cello doubling seems unnecessary, though, these two instruments as a combo is a nice one.

28) Bar 69, brass's passage is fairly impossible with all the slurs.

29) Bar 72, the piece seems to have lost its sense of direction here; it doesn't go anywhere anymore, too much is going on with little coherence and repetition.

30) Bar 76, viola should be divided.

31) Bar 77, oboe and clarinet clash, not a decent sound.

32) Horn being so low at that part, you should notate in bass clef.

33) Bar 78, brass octave/unison doubling, change it, it's not going to sound nice.

34) So you're asking for THREE clarinets now? If you are, you should indicate which part is playing what.

35) Bar 82, sheesh, how many of each woodwinds are you asking for?! And it sounds like a cluster chord, which I think you did not intend.

I think I'm gonna stop here, I"m sure there are more orchestration issues, but yeah... I don't want to make you depressed or lose faith in composing, but yes, mistakes do happen, nothing's wrong with that. However, your next step should be studying orchestration seriously. Putting random melodies for random instruments can really ruin a piece. I can see that you have some interesting ideas in the piece, but if you can't handle it right with the ensemble, it's just gonna get... Boring. But don't worry, keep on trying. Good luck.

PS: Excuse my huge amount of pickyness, it's just that whenever I see orchestration problems, I tend to criticize it, no matter how small it is.

Thank you.

Most of those problems stated above, seems to me like could easily be fixed with the "div" expression/notation. I've played songs with those In, and those with out it in. So, I've never really thought it was necessary.

And as for the oboe part-The duet, i do believe that the 32nd notes are indeed possible. However, The only thing I was worried about was the range. I've seen an oboe part go to the high D, but i was unsure about the Eb.

Bar 82-I did indeed want a cluster chord there.

Bar 69-Possible. Difficult, but possible.

Timpani notation: I am aware of the fact that you can only have as many notes as you have timpanis. Which is why, there isn't a lot of notes, i think 5 different ones. And you can notate it, by means of Tune: Bb, C, Eb, etc. But, Good Timpanists should be able to read the bass clef...

1st page of score indicates its a piano. And, if you do an extract part, it will show up as a piano.

I try to avoid changing Clefs for wind instruments, as most of us, know only one. There are exceptions to the rule of course, but I try to just keep it in their original clef.

As for the Pizzacato part, I thought it sounded quite nice actually. And, I had to adjust the location of the Arco's and and Pizz's so that Finale would pick them up. If they were placed on the note, it wouldn't work.

As for all brass doublings, I fail to see how that is a taboo. Please do explain. And most of the time, the Horn and Trumpet were on different parts. In a live performance, the Horn might be quieter, or in some cases louder.

As for the ensemble selection. That was my friends choosing. I would've added more clarinets, more and some saxophones myself.

As for the Clarinet and Cello/Viola doublings, I know they were unnecessary, but it seemed to thin. And as you said, the doubling sounded very good.

As for the bell's, I was worried about the ranges myself, thank you for informing me.

The oboe comment: Yes, it can go much higher than that, but it'll have confusing fingerings up so high.

The clef comment: All horn players must know how to read the two clefs, if not, then they should reconsider their own professionalism.

Cluster chord: it seem unnecessary and unfitting for a climactic moment.

Brass comment: it's very risky, and because you have multiple brass instruments playing it, you're placing your intonation on jeopardy.

Timpani: No. A set of timpani usually have 4 drums, and each drums is tuned to ONE note at a time, and each drum has a definite range and can only play certain notes, and because you didn't notate it properly, it's going to confuse the percussionist.

Piano: Then write piano in the beginning.

Pizzicato: Just because it sounds nice on Finale, doesn't mean it will in real life. And making it to fit the playback but not proper notation is one of my pet peeves; if you want proper playback and good notation, record it in the improper notation THEN fix it.

Brass doublings: you're putting intonation and timbres into jeopardy as all three instruments were playing in their uncomfortable register (except for horn, but since it's in between, it will be part of the confusing and uncompromising texture).

Ensemble selection: As a composer, you should be aware that no matter how many instruments you ask for, you need to indicate in the BEGINNING of the score.

Clarinet and Cello: Yes, it does sound nice, but it's unnecessary. Cello is already 'thick' enough on its own. Finale doesn't do justice in playback, you need to hear the music in your head, that's what a composer do, not playing back through Finale.

Bells: You're welcome.

Well let me say this-I have found 1 horn player who can read to clefs. And thats because she also plays piano.

As for intonation issues-Thats what individuals practicing is for. Some times in groups so they can have it right.

As for all brass doublings-As a trombonist my self, i'll be the judge of what our comfortable register is. Trumpets are low there, but it is not that bad.

Clarinet and Cello doubling: I originally had it as only the Clarinet. And it sounded fine on its own. I wanted it to sound better. Which in the end it did.

One of the reason's why it might be weird too you is this. I'm basically writing Marching/Concert band music for an orchestra. Which is probably a problem in its self.

Btw, did you think that the ending was too random?

Horn player: If that's what you got, then I guess you'll have to compromise.
Intonation: Problems do happen, practising isn't enough, and somtimes is too risky, it has to be always when you have a live performance.
Brass: Trumpet is too low, it's at its loud register, hence the fact that it will be awkward.
Clarinet and Cello: I think keeping it clarinet is fine enough, adding the cello is unnecessary, as you stated above.

I didn't go through the ending.

Intonation: Problems do happen, practising isn't enough, and somtimes is too risky, it has to be always when you have a live performance.

In detail, instruments of the same color on the same note is (usually) not suitable for most situations except special effects, e.g. tremolo, trills, fluttertounging, etc...

One thing I'll say: on a clarinet, it is hard to do passages that involve the "finger break" from C ---> D (1st C above the staff), e.g. measures around 103.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to argue my point here.

Standard Bb Trumpets can go down to a low F#. The lowest note in that passage is a B, which is a concert A. Which really is not that low.

You didn't even go to the ending? But it SOUNDS really good there. Whether its orchestrated well enough or not i don't know.

Yes, I did not disapprove the fact that the trumpet can't go lower, but I'm just saying, the lower the trumpet goes, the louder it is. And because it's getting gradually louder, it messes up with your timbre.

As for the ending comment, the piece's style was definitely not my cup of tea, hence the fact whether if I listened to the entire thing or not, I won't have a personal opinion about it. But I do not understand how you could say it's 'really good', it's such an opinionated matter that you should let other people decide whether if it's 'really good' or not. A composer should be modest. If a composer has high ego, and a critique comes along and has an opposite comment about your 'really good' piece, you'll feel really bad.

Ok. Here is another one. Its called "Upon One Hope." Its for a wind ensemble. I hope you enjoy.

Because the file attachment thing is being lame on my computer...I have to post it like this.


http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/6/25/1211599/full%20hope.mp3

Copy that into your browser.

It's kind of poorly orchestrated in my opinion. Your doubling and the voicing of the chord made everything sound too heavy and out of context. Your melodies also need to be developed, they felt like countermelodies more than melodies, that's why I think Noir said it was boring. It lacked musicality throughout. But I guess it's mostly because you didn't add enough variety, articulations, and dynamics to it. Furthermore, the orchestration got in the way, definitely.

Yes, poor execution here.

No dominant melody present... read this...
http://forums.ichigos.com/showpost.php?p=367514&postcount=2

As for your orchestration, there are some basic things to keep in mind when working with a concert band. Your main melody instrument is the Trumpet and the Flutes, the trumpet more so than the flutes. While it's not always true, it's framework to work around. Obviously you want other instruments to have the melody and you don't want the trumpets to always have it. The saxes almost never have the melody. They are there for the most part for texture and sometimes double some brass instruments (Alto can double the Horn, Tenor the Trombone, and Bari the Tuba). Don't always stick to this because then your piece become boring when you double all the time. Speaking of which, silence is just as important as sound. Instruments don't have to be playing all the time. Give them a break.

The piece also lacks human expression. Move between extremes in dynamics, add some crescendos. You blew the one part at 0:25 because the climb needed to crescendo but it didn't so it was blah.

Study up some more and give it a try again.

Interestingly enough, at 0:25, there is a crescendo on the score. Playback must have messed up.

For the silence comment: Trumpets actually rest for 23 measures at one point, but that contradicts the trumpet with melody comment. I try not over due the silence stuff too. Just because in one song I played, I had a 73 measure rest. And thats just not fun. So I try to avoid doing stuff like that, but I agree, silence is necessary.

Saxophone comment: I personally think that Tenor Sax goes better with Baritone. And the Alto-horn double is true. But, sometimes, the saxophone does things horns cannot do. At any rate, I haven't played many songs with the Saxophone having the melody, unless its a solo, and unless its jazz.

Ok, here's another one. Called, Starlight.

In writing this, I have carefully reviewed EVERYTHING That you guys have said I've done wrong, and have tried my best to do not in this song. I hope you enjoy.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/6/25/1211599/Starlight.MUS

Here is my latest work. I don't think its as good as my last one, Starlight(which I would still love comments on btw), but Lets see what you think.

Enjoy.

Towers Before Me:

I'm going to be quite critical about this:

Firstly, in your score, you have a drum set with 'x' noteheads playing on the top of the staff. What is the instrument? Indicate that it's a cymbal, please. No one would know what you want if you don't say what it is. Your tempo is also 120 quarters per minute, but what is the style? Metronome markings are usually less important than the indication. Okay, next, how many flutes do you want to play that melody? No, how many flutes are you asking for in the first place? I just can't emphasize how important it is for a composer to indicate everything carefully on a score. If you wish to write music without a score, fine, ignore the details of a score. But since you're posting it, I'll be rather critical. And yikes, are you writing for an orchestra or are you writing for a band-semi-orchestra ensemble thing? There's no bassoon, but strangely, there are saxophones. However, I don't really care about your choice of your instrumentation, that's up to you, not me. The thing is, indicate it properly. How many saxes of each section are you asking for? How many euphoniums?

When the clarinets, oboe, saxes and everything else comes in, which elements do you want to show the audience? All I hear is a mush of counterpoints. It's not strong in presenting melodies or anything for that matter. If you want to present something in the oboe or cor anglais, make the other instruments get out of the way. You try to thicken your orchestration, but instead, you're messing your piece up, I'd say. I know you try to do counterpoints and all that, but do it carefully. What you're doing is only killing what you have done already. I also see there's a crescendo in the drum set. How loud do you want it to go and where does it start? Indicate! Again, I just can't emphasize how important it is to indicate everything carefully as a composer who writes scores. If you want to write music, then follow all the convention, if you want to compose, then just get like a sequencer and record away. There are also a lot of unnecessary doublings, which you can probably figure out. If you can't, ask yourself the question: did I put this part here just for to make it louder? If yes, take it out, there's no point to it. It only makes it thicker. Also, if you do insist doubling, why are you doubling? What are the benefits? Is it an important bass note? Does it have a specific function that needs to be emphasized in the harmony or the melody? Don't even bother saying that it's 'for the colour'. There are no colour if you double clarinets in its chalumeau register in whole notes. Think of it this way, you're a painter painting a landscape. You might highlight little details like flowers, or birds in the sky with different and interesting colours, but then why would you want to highlight the grass? It's everywhere, so there's not much of a point highlighting it. Maybe that wasn't too good of an analogy, but I hope you understand my point.
Bar 29, yikes! A tutti voiced... Poorly. And oh my god, you're asking for two cor anglais now? Again, indication is a problem. Add a double barline before key changes. Oye, bar 39, the ostinato seems tedious. Bar 48, your little flute and oboe thing is thin and squeaky. Bar 62, those triplet things, make them a sextuplet. Two triplets are excessively annoying to read. Same bar, where do you want the two instruments to trill? Up? Down? Start from top? INDICATE! The alto sax part's rhythm is also quite... strange. If you want to slow down a trill, don't write it out like that, write them as grace notes for the next note.

Okay, I'm probably gonna stop here. I'm not trying to depress you or anything. But I am just very critical when it comes to orchestration and people posting scores up. If you want people to see your music in black ink and white paper, make sure it's universally understandable. If you brought that to a recital, the performers might be able to read the notes, but they'd complain madly to the conductor. Finally, don't try so hard to orchestrate. A good composer does not equal a flowery orchestrator, and vice versa. I daresay that Rimsky-Korsakov was not too good of a composer, however, undoubtedly he is an excellent orchestrator. So my advice for you is not to kill your music with orchestration. You'd eventually get hang of it, but for now, get your melodies and harmonies dead down.

Edit: There is a bassoon, but it's just not placed where it's supposed to be.

Wait, The bassoon comes before after English Horn, Before Clarinets right? It is with the double reeds correct?

As for numbering the Instruments per part, Unless noted with "solo, Duet, Trio" or some other term, I think that is more up to the band director/conductor to decide.

As for the expression, I wanted to say "Calm quarter note=120" but, that in itself seems hypocritical. However, I'm sure there is some Latin term for the style, I do not know what it is.

And the 6-tuplets, Yeah, I can understand why that would've been a good thing.

I see also that you dislike "drum set." That, timpani, and mallets, are the only Percussion instruments I can use to get any good percussion sound. I do see why it would be wise to label it as "Percussion" and its parts as "Cymbals, Bass Drum, Snare Drum, etc."

As for the doubling, In the more, evilish, parts of the song (at the first key change for instance), I didn't want the doubling for a nice tone quality, I wanted something evil sounding. Thats also why I had Saxophones in this piece, they can make the ensemble sound very pretty, and very raunchy and evil. And as for the Alto Sax Rhythm there, I wanted a quick trill effect. The original trill note was a G#, but then I wanted it to end on a B, But I can see your reasoning for grace notes. And, I may be mistaken, but for trills, don't you start on the note, in the Bassoons case here a D, and then trill up a half step unless otherwise noted?

And I did have one question, The English Horn, what are its ranges?

Wait, The bassoon comes before after English Horn, Before Clarinets right? It is with the double reeds correct?

As for numbering the Instruments per part, Unless noted with "solo, Duet, Trio" or some other term, I think that is more up to the band director/conductor to decide.

As for the expression, I wanted to say "Calm quarter note=120" but, that in itself seems hypocritical. However, I'm sure there is some Latin term for the style, I do not know what it is.

And the 6-tuplets, Yeah, I can understand why that would've been a good thing.

I see also that you dislike "drum set." That, timpani, and mallets, are the only Percussion instruments I can use to get any good percussion sound. I do see why it would be wise to label it as "Percussion" and its parts as "Cymbals, Bass Drum, Snare Drum, etc."

As for the doubling, In the more, evilish, parts of the song (at the first key change for instance), I didn't want the doubling for a nice tone quality, I wanted something evil sounding. Thats also why I had Saxophones in this piece, they can make the ensemble sound very pretty, and very raunchy and evil. And as for the Alto Sax Rhythm there, I wanted a quick trill effect. The original trill note was a G#, but then I wanted it to end on a B, But I can see your reasoning for grace notes. And, I may be mistaken, but for trills, don't you start on the note, in the Bassoons case here a D, and then trill up a half step unless otherwise noted?

And I did have one question, The English Horn, what are its ranges?


Bassoon is a bass instrument, hence it's in the bottom of the woodwind system. You should also have some basic understanding of Italian terms either ways. Also, what you hear in the recordings from Finale or whatever aren't realistic, therefore, your 'pretty' or 'evil' sounds doesn't exist the way you want it. You need to learn the real sounds of the instruments in order do orchestration. As for the cor anglais question, it's E below the treble staff up to E or F above the treble staff. You should know the ranges of the instruments you're writing for. As for trills, it depends on the context, with more contemporary works, it would start on the note of, but then for more classical contexts, you would trill from the note above down. So you need to indicate. Furthermore, the solo, a 2, a 3 thing isn't up to the conductor. It's you. You're the composer, you need to tell them. The conductor is just there to keep everything together. The composer is the one that's really getting the music across.

Also, I don't dislike the idea of the drum set thing. If writing out scores were as easy as the way you did it, I would be glad. Unfortunately, there are conventions you need to follow. Compositions are like stories. Surely storytellers are good at telling stories with their voice like composers that doesn't write down music could be equally good composers. However, if you are a novelist, you still need to follow the grammars and conventions, just like a composer should follow all their conventions in writing scores. I think it's something important that you need to learn.

Really, Most Concert band scores have it under the Oboe (or English horn if there is one) , but then again it might be different for Orchestra. Oh I do know some Italian terms, Just not one for "Calm, but at a quick tempo." And usually, Finale is accurate when it comes to sounds for wind instruments, granted, its not perfect, and is nothing compared to the real thing, but it does work. However, for strings...it sucks. And its not as if I don't know what these Instruments sound like, I've been around them, and play all the brass ones.

And usually, Finale is accurate when it comes to sounds for wind instruments, granted, its not perfect, and is nothing compared to the real thing, but it does work.

As long as it doesn't 'compare', then it isn't 'accurate'. Being 'around' instruments also doesn't mean you know them well enough so that you can say: 'oh that articulation in strings is called a spiccato' or 'oh, the way you notate a legato tongue on woodwinds is adding a tenuto marking under the note'. It's not just 'knowing the sound'. It's knowing how you notate a certain sound.

Ahh, But on that note, I thought I did notate "Pizzicato, and Legato" correctly. Pizzicato is "pizz" and Legato is marked with a slur marking, or "Legato"

Those are the simple ones, but you didn't add any little details and nuance to it. Besides, what kind of legato do you want? Tongued legato for the winds? 'Gliss' legato for the strings?

Gliss Legato is usually marked with a squiggly line from one note to the next, with the word "Glissando" or "Gliss." on it. And if I wanted tongued Legato, then i would probably just use tenuto

Not the squiggly line, just a straight line connecting from one note to the next. But my point is: be specific when notating.

Not the squiggly line, just a straight line connecting from one note to the next.
Not unless the people who make Finale are music-illiterate.

Not unless the people who make Finale are music-illiterate.

It's only a straight line, really. Go look at some old scores. Squiggly lines are for the appregiated chords.

Not unless the people who make Finale are music-illiterate.

In my opinion, it seems as though they were too lazy to put everything in. Here's how you do it:

1. Obviously, get your 2 notes ready.
2. Click the Glissando tool.
3. In the toolbars, right next to "Tools", you'll see "SmartShape" pop up. Click that.
4. Click "Smart Shape Options".
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/1-2.png
5. Right next to the "1", click "Select".
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/2-2.png
6. Click "Create".
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/3-1.png
7. Right next to "Center Full", click "Edit".
8. Type in "gliss.". (I personally prefer italics.) Click "OK".
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/7.png
9. Right next to "Center Full", click "Position".
10. Click "gliss." and center it. Click "OK".
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/4.png
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/3-1.png11. Click "OK".
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/2-2.png
12. Click "Select".

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/5.png13. Click "OK". (Make sure that it says "Glissando" next to the number.)
14. Click on the Glissando Tool, if you haven't already, and click on the starting note.
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/6.png

That's it. x_x

EDIT: And that's not the worst part of it. Every time you make a new file, you'll have to create it over and over and over again. x_x In other words, you can only keep it in the current file you're using.

My finale has built in glissandos, and they are most definitely squiggly. However, unlike chord rolls (or arpeggiation marks), they are not verticle, they simply connect the two notes. However, I have seen scores marked with a straight line that I was told meant to "slide" between the notes, but I'm not sure if there's a difference.

My finale has built in glissandos, and they are most definitely squiggly. However, unlike chord rolls (or arpeggiation marks), they are not verticle, they simply connect the two notes. However, I have seen scores marked with a straight line that I was told meant to "slide" between the notes, but I'm not sure if there's a difference.

It's most probably Finale used a font with a slightly different style from the original. I mean, Sibelius uses a straight line, so I'm guessing that Finale doesn't want Sibelius to sue them for having identical symbols for their fonts.

Well, in songs that I've played, I've seen both straight and squiggly, and quite honestly, if they are both marked Glissando, does it really matter?

Well, in songs that I've played, I've seen both straight and squiggly, and quite honestly, if they are both marked Glissando, does it really matter?

It does, in fact, in some scores, straight lines are to be played as gliss but then there aren't any words or any indication saying it's a gliss.

Furthermore, like I stated before, when you score music, you need to be specific. The attitude of 'As long as it's whatever, I don't care' doesn't take you anywhere as a composer. In another words, if you don't want to care about it, don't use it. I mean, you don't care about how to properly use it, why bother? You need to know a rule in order to break a rule.

I mean, if its clearly saying on the score by means of a line, or the word gliss, "Gliss from this note, to this one." Then does it really matter much at all. I know, one form is right, one form is wrong, but, both mean the same, and if both are used in a way the conductor and the player can understand, and both methods bring the same results, does it matter?

You didn't seem to have read my comment properly: There are lines that are supposedly to be played as gliss, but they were not indicated as gliss. Therefore, the line could mean anything. Performers may ask what kind of gliss is it? Chromatic gliss on a piano? Continuous 'slide' gliss on a violin? Or a whole tone gliss on a harp?

Only the composer would know exactly what they want, but if you don't tell your performers what you want, then you probably won't be satisfied with your results.

__________________________________________________ _______






















~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~















________________________-





~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

...Noir, I believe your going to have to explain that one to me.

Oh I'm sorry, weren't we discussing typography and other irrelevant nonsense?

Its not irrelevant, but yes. We were. That doesn't mean you should post a bunch of lines and squiggles.

I see that you don't appreciate my sense of delivery. I'll explain myself with all the rough edges then;

Your music is flat and boring. This is not because you can't write, I'm sure you can, but the height of all your compositions is (and I'm being generous) 'interesting'. However, because they indeed look interesting on paper and often sound promising during the opening, the sense of disappointment which follows kills the bond between the listener and your piece.

First off, your pieces always stays the same throughout the whole duration. If I were to keep you interested in a story, I wouldn't tell you the adventurous tale about 'The trecherous reign of communism and social effects caused by Joseph Stalin'. What I mean by this absurd analogy is that your ability to create curiosity, excitement or fondness in your writing is next to non-existant. Instead, tell the very same story, but depict all your characters by morphing them into animals. Use these characters to give references to real life by using metaphorical situations, ironic outcomes and and a wink of satire. George Orwell did this in 1945 in the novel 'Animal Farm' with great success.

If there's something broke in your musicanship which is to be mended, I hardly think it would be that of a glissando or a squiggly line.

In other words, your problem lies not in notation right now, but in composing with a direction.

Ok, I think I get what your saying. Is it like, the begging is good, but you just lose interest mid way through the song?

Musically speaking, what Noir said is entirely true. Your music is not strong enough to attract the audience. What point are you trying to make in music? Do you write just for the heck of it? Even if you do, you ought to have a reason to write. Where is it inspired from? Where do you want your piece to go? From what you wrote, it seems like you were just merely stuffing chords and ideas together. Forget about orchestration and technical aspects, but focus on the music itself. Forget all my technical comments earlier, maybe I was a little too focused on technicalities then; you should take a step back and reconsider your way of composing. Yes, music could be technical and still could sound good. However, it's music after all, it needs musicality and give satisfaction. So where's your musicality?

What Porsche said was true too. Where did you start your piece? Where are you leading it to? Where is your statement of theme? Where is the climax?

Well, In all honesty, The reason why I write music, is because I enjoy writing music. There isn't some deep motivation for it. Its just something I enjoy doing, so I do it. When I write, I do think about what I'm doing, but my music doesn't show the way I feel or how someone or something is feeling, contrary to composers like Bach who's music reflected the time period. And that in itself might be the problem.

I would have to disagree that saying Bach's music is known for his time period. Sure, you can listen to his music of his contemporaries, and it will be similar, but I do not solely classify him as periodic composer. As to my expierence, Bach can be considered the creator of "Music" since he gave us the roots of what music was to be expanded upon. Expanded a little by Mozart; stretched and opened by Beethoven; romantisized by Chopin, Liszt, Schumann, Berlioz; re-made by Debussy, Ravel, Stravinsky and also stamped together by Rachmaninoff. All of these composers knew exactly what they were doing, but I can't [solely] say that their music reflected their time period.

As mentioned, Rachmaninoff for example.

Well, here is a Trombone solo with Piano Accompaniment.

I hope you Enjoy.

The most problematic thing in your new piece is its harmonies. The progression felt too... Well, random. My suggestion for you would be to learn how chords progress logically. The score is also kind of messy. Yes, it's okay if you notate two different dynamics on the two staves of the piano, but if the two staves' dynamics are the same, there's no point doing it twice, unless you're doing it for the playback, which you shouldn't. Also, bar 12, what is that marcato doing there? It doesn't serve much purpose. If you want a stronger note, have a quarter note with an accent on top, no need for a marcato in this 'calm' context. Bar 34, use 2/8 instead of 1/4. It's just... too strange of a time signature to use. The piece just felt very random throughout.

Ah yes, the 1/4. I did that because making the 3/4 a 4/4 just seemed like it would mess up the phrasing and the measure would look weird.

And i had one question, the 8va in the 5/4 section? Should I have gone with out that?

I can't really judge because the piece itself is pretty... Confusing, no offence. It's too out of context for me to say anything to give you actual technical advice on its melodic or harmonic progressions.

.

@titan - My thoughts exactly. :)

@Tears[1]- Well. . . I think Dot mentioned alot of what was wrong. With your piano, never write close notes when you get below the G in the bass clef (for example, thirds, fourths, it's better to have fifths and octaves, becase you can't really hear melodic/counterpoint very well when your usuing very harmonic intervals [as mentioned]).

That applies to most instruments, not just piano.

Ok. Here is another one. It describes my friend Kenny. Deep down, he's a really nice guy. But some times, He's a complete jerk and he causes a lot of Drama with me and my friends. Hence the mix of calm and dramatic themes.

Enjoy and Critique

I lost my interest by the first minute of the piece. Again, this piece lacks direction and a sense of motivation. To put it bluntly, your music starts, and goes off randomly and doesn't know where it's heading or where's its ending. As I would say to many other beginner composers, stay focus to a motif or melody. Don't overkill the piece with a bunch of 'stuff' just to give it variety. I rather listen to something repetitive and say that mere section was 'good' than saying 'I don't even know what's good or bad in your piece anymore; there's too much going on'. Furthermore, your harmony felt like blocks and blocks of 'harmony'. Where's the music? I don't mean to offend or belittle, but take a step back. Take another perspective and approach to composing. Don't write anything instrumental when you compose ideas and motifs. Get your ideas straight, then you piece your ideas together. If you merely go on and just fit in notes, it's not music that people would relate to. Even if they try to, they can't. I won't bother to talk about orchestration, for it is obvious if I continue to tell you more technical issues, you'll just become a more 'robotic' composer. But don't give up.

See, thats what I don't get. I keep taking that step back. I do piece the idea's together, and I do start out with a common Melody. The Melody in this song is there about 10 times in the 5 minute song. And all but 2 times, when its not the Melody its the counter Melody, So I'm sticking to one melody. I keep planning, but that doesn't seem to be working. It might be because my songs, the switch mood. I don't like songs, that are calm and quiet the whole time. That bores me. I like songs that switch things up. That might be the problem in itself.

Is the melody long enough? Is it memorable? Is it hummable? Is it effective so that people would want to hear it again? What distinctive features are there in your melody? Do you let your melody flow? You need to put all these questions into consideration in order to craft something memorable. Granted, some people don't even think about these stuff and they get a catchy tune, but everyone's starting point is different. Harmonies and counterpoints are also important factors to contribute to a melody's effectiveness. My greatest suggestion for you is to perhaps write a mere piano solo. No. A single line of 8 bars melody then slowly building upon it. After you have a piece of adequate melodies and harmonies, THEN you orchestrate and do whatever with it.

Once again, thats what I do. I always start with the Melody on just a piano. And when you say "would people like to hear it again?" That depends on the listener entirely. What might be amazing and memorable to me, could sound like crap to someone else. I know plenty of people who hate Bach, and Mozart, and all of the greatest composers. A song could be orchestrated and written perfectly, but it is never guaranteed success. I understand what your trying to tell me to do, but the thing is, I've been doing that. And it obviously isn't working, because I haven't received a single good comment from a person on this forum, but at the same time, all of my friends love them, and they are all musicians. just like everyone else here, and the all have trained ears to catch bad mistakes. So, I don't know who's perspective to follow. The people here, who hate it, or the people who love it.

"Would people like to hear it again?" doesn't merely mean 'liking' or 'adoring' it. It just asks whether if the person would want to hear it again for assurance and understanding of the melody again.

Personally speaking, I don't listen to people for advice. It doesn't work. Friends are usually biased and say it's nice. Strangers like us here are rather temperamental and are different in opinions. Your best critique is yourself. Be honest. Compare yourself to other composers, what 'goods' are in them that you don't have? You need to be your own audience. Being a composer for everyone else isn't always much 'worthy', meanwhile, if you think for yourself sometimes, that's when you'll be unique, and people would admire you as a composer.

Its not just my friends. My band Director, who hates me with all of his might, did enjoy one song, and actually let us play it in class one day. It was Starlight btw. But that isn't the point.

All right, if the best critique is myself, I think my work is good. And people have listened to it again and again. If they were being biased, the wouldn't listen to it more than once. And sometimes, being unique, makes things worse. If i decided to be unique, had an unusual style of writing, kept on using different themes over and over again, and go about breaking all the rules of orchestration, would that make this song better or worse?

Being unique doesn't mean killing conventions. You just need to find a balance and work your way around.

As for your second answer: What makes you think it is worthy? Can you compare it to other people's works? What are you to your favourite composer? Think. Don't narrow your perspective down to merely your 'circle' of people. Use other composers as your models.

How in the world am I supposed to model Handel?

He said to use them as your model not to model them.

Well, it's not impossible. Look at his style, study his music, listen to his music gazillion times, and write like a Handel. I can't deny the fact that my own music utilized conventions of Ravel and Debussy. Nothing is wrong using stylistic elements from your favourite composer.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/6/25/1211599/The%20Orient.mp3
http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/6/25/1211599/The%20Orient.pdf

Here is the oriental piece I did. My inspiration for this one was Fu mon, by Hiroshi Hoshina. Its a weird instrumentation I know, but please comment.

First of all: 'Oriental style' is not a tempo marking. It says nothing to the performers or the conductor. From the sight of the score, I can say that there's too much homophony over polyphony. Which makes a piece really boring if you don't have anything to contrast or if you continuosly use it. Besides, you have this entire large ensemble. You're not writing for choir or piano here, rhythms don't always have to be the same.

Well, after listening to the first few bars, there are already quite a few orchestration problems that needs to be attended to: firstly: your second flute is TOO LOUD. Then, when it goes above the first flute, why didn't you just give the lower part to the second in the first place? But yes, I said I won't comment on your orchestration much anymore, not because it's adequate, but it's for the fact that you need to learn how to handle the music first (just like learning how to draw before learning how to colour).

Again, the main issue is that your ideas are all 'random'. It doesn't give a sense of progression in many ways. The harmonies are merely 'chords', it's not really a chord progression at all. The musical ideas are just not focused or clear. Again, as I commented previously: your music really really lacks 'focus' or 'direction' as some people may call it. Also, it's not really quite 'oriental', it's just like an imitation of oriental music. Learn about the pentatonic scales and its styles before writing a piece as such. Listening to a piece and 'getting inspired' then executing it won't make it effective.

As I mentioned before, my suggestion for your next step is to take your music down a notch. Learn how to write a decent piece with little instruments before writing for large ensembles.

It's really important for you to write for piano or small ensembles and learn the vitals in counterpoint and harmony functions before you do anything big. So I strongly suggest you to do it.

Once again, you are your own critique when it comes to music: Be honest to yourself when you judge.

Flute Comment at the beginning: I didn't wanna cut Flute one off of the melody. It was mostly for phrasing reasons. And the two instruments were at the same dynamic, and on a when its only 2 flutes playing, the one with the moving line is most definitely going to be heard more.

Chord Comment: Throughout the later part of the song, (41 on), there really aren't much chords there at all. At 41, the the only possible chord progression is in the Trombone part. And that lasts till 57, and at 57, The melody is chords and the harmony are pizzicato strings.

And Oriental style isn't a tempo marking, but, unless you wanted me to just put quarter note= 129, then there really wasn't much I could do.

For the flute thing; giving that part to second flute makes no difference. The melody still moves according to the way you want it to. Besides, think of yourself as the second flautist, would you want to play boring notes or melodies? Also, they're both at the same dynamic, then they'd interfere with each other anyways.

By chord, I was using it as a synonym to harmony. And of course you can always do something to that tempo marking, how many terms are there to describe music? A lot. Use it.

And please do not just read my technical comments, please also have some regard to my other comments as techniques aren't always what makes 'music'.

Oh, I read them. I just don't have any comments on them that I haven't already said before, so I don't think I need to repeat them.

And Please, do not begin to talk to me about the concept of "boring notes." Composers are not fair when they distribute the "fun" line. I play trombone, trust me on this one. Most songs, we get the melody, 1 time. For 3 seconds.

And Please, do not begin to talk to me about the concept of "boring notes." Composers are not fair when they distribute the "fun" line. I play trombone, trust me on this one. Most songs, we get the melody, 1 time. For 3 seconds.

Well, if all composers think this way, then I guess all the musicians that's not first chair or principal doesn't need anything interesting to play. Or for the matter of fact, they don't need to play at all, since they're gonna be 'boring' anyways. <_< You're the composer, you can be fair. Besides, my composition teacher strongly highlights the fact that all instruments are capable of presenting the melody. Stravinsky alternates instruments when it comes to presenting foreground and middleground elements, as does many master orchestrators. Also, it gives an extra touch of interest. So no, I strongly disagree with your argument.

PS: Not to offend, but I'm sure band directors chose certain pieces with certain lines for certain instruments for a certain reason. You can't expect a 7th grade band's third flautist to play the beginning passage of die Moldau.

Oh yes, that Is true. All instruments are completely capable of playing the Melody. A trombone can do anything a horn can but better, and we can hold a Melody just as well as the trumpets, and we can do harmonies even better. We just cant do technical passages as well as other instruments because we are limited to the motion of our what are arm is capable. Example-Write an "allegro" song with the trombones going from a low Bb to a Low B. See how many actual players can play it write on a normal tenor trombone. And yes, I know that there our songs in which the trombone does get the melodic line, but the fact is fact, for most composers purposes, the trombone is a harmony instrument, and it is VERY rare for us to get a melody for more than one 8 measures of a song.

And as for the director comment-Eh, as much as I wish that were true, its not. We played Hounds of Spring last year. (GAH)

Hello? Melody does not always equal to virtuostic passages, nor have I said it was. Please do not put words in my mouth. I guess that's your problem with composing here: you think that certain things must be certain ways. But you never think of the fact that there's always things outside of the box or the way you think it is. If you consistently think that your 'ways' of doing things are the only 'ways' to do things, then I guess my attempts to help and my criticisms are pointless either ways.

As for my PS note, I think you interpreted it too positively.

Well, I guess I just don't know what to suggest anymore. It seems like that you are not willing to attempt to 'write' music. As you said before, you're composing for the mere 'heck' of it. Well, writing mere notes in Finale for the 'heck' of it isn't writing music. I guess that's my final words for you for now. I am sorry, but I was really trying to help.

Hmm, Well as for the thing about melodies, you said melodies have to be memorable right? For some reason, I dont really think that whole note passages are that memorable.

And you really misunderstood me. I don't write for the heck of it. I write because I enjoy it. I still put pride in it, and I still do it. I don't just do this for the heck of it. It means something to me. And quite honestly, the things you've been saying haven't really been "helpfull." I understand what this means "Move down, write for smaller ensembals, or just a piano." But the thing is, thats harder for me. I need space to do put it all down, a piano doesn't cover it. I know, I could do an piano rendering of an orchestra piece in my head, but then It wouldn't really be possible. It just doesn't work for me. I've even tried it before, and it got the exact same results.

Sir DOTdotdot, You Seem like an intellegent lad...But I have a question for u: well are you a grad student at the local tech. college? cause u seem like a guy thats in my class?

Well, I guess I just don't know what to suggest anymore. It seems like that you are not willing to attempt to 'write' music. As you said before, you're composing for the mere 'heck' of it. Well, writing mere notes in Finale for the 'heck' of it isn't writing music. I guess that's my final words for you for now. I am sorry, but I was really trying to help.

"Writing music" doesn't mean following a checklist of rules that you believe he should follow. Let him do what he wants. Music is entertainment. If he enjoys what he's doing, let him do it. Why do you care if he's composing "for the heck of it"? I doubt he plans to have an orchestra play back his music soon. I read over your posts here and you seem to not be able to choose what your opinions are, first you decry him for having the opinion that his music was really good, then you tell him he shouldn't take critiques too seriously and composer for himself.....you stress that conventions and rules are important while also stressing the importance of thinking outside conventions, or "thinking outside the box". You tell him that he's at fault for thinking that certain things should be a certain way, and yet I can't even count how many times you've said "this and this never play in unision. It just doesn't happen." in various permutations. Well, a lot of things "just didn't happen" in music - until someone came along and made it happen well. Basically, just using a haughty and superior attitude isn't enough, there has to be some substance there too.

Well, I don't think Sir. Dot was intending to be "superior" to anyone here. Take my words or leave them, but I saw Dot only helping out and giving suggestions; on the other hand, the people that have responded are actually going deeper than what was said--just read over what he said, and apply it. I'm not really trying to put anyone one down (or anyone up, for that matter) but just trying to help everyone tell you that if someone tries to help out, no matter how critical, you should at least ponder it before you question it.

If he enjoys what he's doing, let him do it. Why do you care if he's composing "for the heck of it"?.
Because that's the whole fucking point of having these discussion threads? We post music here to get opinions of others.

How do I turn off the reverb in Finale 2009?

Edit: this is NOT the right place to ask this question.