I see what you are saying about measure 4 and 13...thanks for the useful suggestions. :D I put the G-A clash there to have a minor i 7th chord. *hopes it worked*

This one isn't done yet...just have to work on it next week after exams are over. :heh: I wanted it to have a repeat pattern of AABCBA, but I only got to C. xD

I finally finished it! I would really appreciate some comments on this one, as I'm planning on entering it into a couple of scholarship competitions. :heh:

Hmm for some reason my finale doesn't want to play any of your pieces. It opens them up but refuses to play them with sound. An mp3 would be nice.

I tried uploading an mp3, but it took too long and timed out. :heh: I'll put the zip file here:
http://uploadingit.com/d/TG1LAO7LGGVXXFJV

edit: Are you using a mac? My pieces play without sound on the school computers until I assign AU units, so maybe that's why it won't play.

Yes actually I am using a mac. I don't know how to assign AU units and such. Anyway, about the your tarantella. The best parts for me were when you changed to 3/4 (yes I know it isn't notated that way but it sounds like it is in triple simple meter). At first I wasn't thrilled with the opening, due to the unnatural progression of chords, but it grew on me, and now I find its quirkiness quite refreshing. However, I'n not a fan of the transition from mm. 20-21. It is very deceptive and disrupts the flow of the music for me. When you have the cello play 16th notes in the passage starting at mm. 27 did you want the cross-relation of the f in the piano and the f sharp in the cello? It sounds quite dissonant. From then on the piece rambles a bit before repeating the material from the beginning. Perhaps you have too many ideas/motifs going through your head because you seem to start/introduces new ones without ever finishing the previous thought. Overall there are some lovely things in this piece. Like I said the 3/4 sections are my favorite (especially the brief pause followed by 16th notes as in mm. 54) As for the rest of the piece, I will await your response because I hate writing long posts.

Funny story about the 3/4 section...I didn't realize I set the tempo to quarter note = 80 instead of dotted quarter note = 80. XD It's kind of amusing that a mistake made a section of this piece better. xD

Is the transition at measure 20-21 bad? I thought I got the whole dimished iv chord thing to work. :heh:

Hey guys, do you hear popping noises in this recording? I'm entering this into a competition and don't know if I'm the only one hearing the noises in the recording...

http://uploadingit.com/d/TNYKINLRJGJL2VME

Sorry about triple posting, but I think I fixed the point in tarantella that seemed to "ramble on" for a few measures. :heh:

I'm not sure I like the piece as a whole, but I loved measures 14 and 50. These small touches of great music often go unnoticeable, especially since they are like one or two seconds long, but I loved the simplicity and effectiveness of your writing there.

By the way, please remove your referral link in your signature.

*kills ref link*

What made you not like the piece as a whole? :eek:

Hey guys, do you hear popping noises in this recording? I'm entering this into a competition and don't know if I'm the only one hearing the noises in the recording...

http://uploadingit.com/d/TNYKINLRJGJL2VME

I hear the popping noise. Sounds like the audio going off and on there.

Did you base this in the first music game I did? I hear after the half, the main melody I did for the music game, lol.

http://forums.ichigos.com/showpost.php?p=396110&postcount=2

Did I base it off the game? I didn't mean to...:heh:

Well, this really sucks. I seriously can NOT think of anything new to write. x_x

Guess I spoke too soon. This is for a contest, and for some reason I had an image of a vampire castle as I was writing it. XD One of the contest rules was that it couldn't be over a minute long, so that's why its kinda short...

I like the mood of the piece, and I really like some of your harmonies. What is with the random 2/4, and 1/4 bars in the piece?

Guess I spoke too soon. This is for a contest, and for some reason I had an image of a vampire castle as I was writing it. XD One of the contest rules was that it couldn't be over a minute long, so that's why its kinda short...

I still notice the same problem with your form - holding a note on a fermata when the phrase seems to sound incomplete and starting a new section. The cresc. is not as dramatic at meas. 5 - 6 as you want it to be (as marked) because you don't add anything new to the chord that is supposed to be the most emphasized; the notes are just held to the forte (anticipation in all voices, in a way). At meas. 9, avoid parallel octaves on all the string parts unless you really want an emphasis on a melody, especially.

I like the mood of the piece, and I really like some of your harmonies. What is with the random 2/4, and 1/4 bars in the piece?

The 2/4 at the beginning and end are there because sometimes things get cut off when saving as an audio file. It seems like EVERY time I save as an audio file, 3 seconds get cut off on both ends. T_T


I still notice the same problem with your form - holding a note on a fermata when the phrase seems to sound incomplete and starting a new section. The cresc. is not as dramatic at meas. 5 - 6 as you want it to be (as marked) because you don't add anything new to the chord that is supposed to be the most emphasized; the notes are just held to the forte (anticipation in all voices, in a way). At meas. 9, avoid parallel octaves on all the string parts unless you really want an emphasis on a melody, especially.

The parallel octaves in the strings were intended, but I'll definatly try to fix some of the other things you mentioned. Thanks for the feedback. ^.^

Why did you end the first section on a second inversion chord? In some contexts, that might make sense (in atonal music, for one, or if you were voicing it in such a way that you were creating a resultant, which basically means you are making it sound like the bass note of the chord is the root an octave lower by recreating its overtone series...I can give you examples if you want), but I think in this case it is just a little confusing.

Do you have a text for the choir?

I see what you're saying about the chord...I fixed it. ^.^

Zippy, please post midi or mp3 with you pieces. They don't play in my finale. Just export an Aiff or Wave file from Finale and convert it to mp3 in itunes. Thank you.

You know, you could always just use finale reader, umshfmodec. However, it would be nicer, zippy, if you posted a midi or something.

Sorry about that! :heh: I always forget. xD Here you go:

http://uploadingit.com/d/VCSRYX0HUUKOPLTZ

I agree with the guy above whose name I don't remember - I like the mood of the piece. However, since it is only supposed to be a minute long, it's even more important to write it in a way that people will be affected by it! I think it was Deathraider, or perhaps someone else, who said in a different thread, that you should study your favourite composer and the compositions he/she created in order to improve your own. I think you should consider that. After all, if someone's work affects you deeply, it would be dumb not to try to figure out just why it affects you as deeply as it does =)

A one-minute-composition challenge is quite interesting actually...

I'm glad alot of people here like the piece I wrote...hopefully I win that contest, haha. :P I see what you're saying about studying my fav composer...I actually bought the music for Dvorak's cello concerto in Bm to analyze since I only listen to it about 5000 times a day, but I've been bogged down with work lately and haven't actually had time to analyze it past the first or second page. T_T

I love the chorale style of it... are those voices I'm hearing in the piece...?

...The building up towards the climax was definitely great; although I was expecting a sudden attack because the song is named "vampire" -__-

I must say this is your best piece out of all the ones I've heard up till now. I can't really offer any real solid constructive criticism. Good luck with the contest.

I like the cello last notes.

Good luck! :)

Thanks everyone! :D I'm glad people actually like it. xP

Wow, I haven't been here in a while! (EFFING SCHOOL!!! >_<) Anyways, I wanted some feedback on this piece...I entered it into a contest, but it didn't win. So I want some second opinions as to what is bad/good with this piece, because I honestly didn't see anything terrible about it. :heh:

Wow, I haven't been here in a while! (EFFING SCHOOL!!! >_<) Anyways, I wanted some feedback on this piece...I entered it into a contest, but it didn't win. So I want some second opinions as to what is bad/good with this piece, because I honestly didn't see anything terrible about it. :heh:

How do I explain this... the piece seems to lack a well-defined form. The first spot in which I notice this is probably the second strong beat of meas. 13. From there to meas. 36, it seems as though you're just trying to throw ideas together. Also, there's a horizontalization of an E minor chord from meas. 31 - 36; if you keep repeating the E minor chord, it lacks its "power," i.e. it isn't as strong toward trying to hit the tonic chord (or A minor, when you repeat the phrase again at 37). At meas. 37, you repeat the whole phrase again - this creates a further lack of interest that lengthens from what I described from meas. 13 - 36.

Meas. 49 - 50 makes me think, "oh, it's the same phrase but with a rit., big deal" - the rit. there, along with the repeating phrase, makes it seem, before you pass the rit., as though you're going to make some variation on meas. 13 - 36. But you don't - you do introduce an idea, but it's not very memorable; it's fragmented. Then after, you bring back the first idea, and then later, you bring back the fragmented idea in its original form, further making the listener uninterested. Then you bring back your first idea in its full form (which doesn't help), then add some variations on the tonic chord, then it's finished.

Meas. 13 is perhaps where the piece stops being interesting; the main issues I see with this piece is its lack of a sense of direction, form, and that the piece itself is a bunch of ideas that are bundled up together but do not complement each other, and that do not make a cohesive "organic whole" (quote from Felix Salzer) of music. Look at the piece of music as one "organic whole" and see if every bit of it complements each other well.

It's funny you mention that measure 13 is where it stopped getting interesting...because that was the point I stopped writing it down on paper. :heh: Thanks for mentioning that, because now I REALLY see what people are talking about when they say to write a piece down first before editing it on the computer. It's too bad I'm probably not going to have any time until the end of school in a month to start changing things with this piece, but thanks for all the helpful advice. Now I have something productive to do over the summer besides learning the rest of the haydn concerto! xP

Wow, I really haven't been here in a while! xD Now that school is done with (FOREVER!!!) I should be able to post more things. xP I haven't finished any compositions yet, but here's an arrangement of the FMA opening theme for string quartet that I started today:

edit: BTW, I got a new macbook yesterday, so I made this on that computer and don't know if it will work on windows. Let me know if it doesen't please...:heh:

Wow, I really haven't been here in a while! xD Now that school is done with (FOREVER!!!) I should be able to post more things. xP I haven't finished any compositions yet, but here's an arrangement of the FMA opening theme for string quartet that I started today:

edit: BTW, I got a new macbook yesterday, so I made this on that computer and don't know if it will work on windows. Let me know if it doesen't please...:heh:

Yeah, it doesn't work on Windows (unless people want to take the time to insert all of the VST instruments themselves). I'd suggest a .mp3 conversion? or even .mid?

clarinetist: if you go into finale go to MIDI/Audio, click play as midi and it'll work

Zip:I'm assuming this is pretty accurate. however, the only thing i can say is, idk how a drumset and string quartet would work well together live.

I'll add an mp3 when it's halfway finished. :heh:

@etaroko: I was wondering if that would work too, but this song is just NOT the same without a drum set. :\

I just listened to your finished tarantella piece. I'd have to say it is a piece that grows on you. At first I didn't like as much but after listening to it I like it more and more. May I ask you about your composition process? Do you compose with a form in mind or do you just roll with it? Do you always have a tonal, and melodic goal in mind before you write something or do you allow your musicality to tell you what to do? Just curious. I especially like the triple meter stuff and when the theme comes back for a brief instance in major.

Well, I started with "I'm gonna be different and have an AABCBA form!", but then after I stopped writing on paper (BIGGEST mistake ever, that's why only the first 13 measures make any sense) and started to write the rest on finale, I kinda just rolled with it. :heh: I don't hate this piece, but I certainly don't LIKE it. xD I'm DEFINATLY going to try to fix it this summer, or maybe 2nd semester of college after I have learned more music theory.

What was your final choice about college? What did you decide to study?

Oh, I'm going to UNLV for music composition. :P I hope I can minor in Japanese next semester...didn't have time for it for first semester.

That's where Eric Whitacre went...

That is nice. I hope you learn and expand your skills and creativity there. I wish you the best.

Thanks! Maybe I can escape out of this 4 month composer's block once I start learning more...:P

When I get composers block, I usually try reading. It either clears my mind allowing to to think a bit clearer for when I write, or it gives me something to write about. But thats just me.

I usually play halo (DON'T LAUGH, IT WORKS SOMETIMES! XD) or put the piece down for a few hours hoping I will have a new idea by then, but...that hasn't been working lately. :eek:

Hey guys. I finished my FMA arrangement on the plane ride yesterday. Tell me what you think. :P

I'M ALIVE!!! :kfreaked: Haha. Haven't been here in a while because of college and other stuff that took time away for coming here. I did start a couple of new things since I was last here, but I got an idea the other day to look back at some of my old stuff and change it around so it makes more sense, so I wanted to get some opinions on it.

Basically what I did was change some chords so the voice leading and chord progressions made more sense, and I also changed some spots that really didn't work at all. The original version is on the bottom of page 22 on this thread, in case if anyone wants to compare it to the old one. :P

If you don't play the cello yourself, I can tell you've researched it. Good job—this looks like it's both playable and complements some of the cello's strengths.

My biggest issue with this is that the piano part is just doubling the cello line for a lot of it. That could get really problematic in measures 71&72, where both players are supposed to accelerate and slow down together. With such a fast passage, that's pretty much going to be impossible, and it'll sound really crumby when they get off sync. Plus, a different type accompaniment would just make the piece more interesting. Check out some of Faure's works for cello. He does a fantastic job of balancing between the two instruments.

I actually do play cello, lol. :P I didn't really think doubling the melody would be a problem, but I'll see if I can come up with something different that fits in with all the accidentals.

I made a better piano part at the spot you mentioned.

I think that works SO much better. The rests in the piano give the cello line a real force to it. Way to go! That packs a serious punch.

I'm going to list a couple of places where you have parallel octaves which I think are somewhat questionable (obviously there are places where you are just doubling the melody but some places it seems like they may have been accidental because they only occur for a moment):

First of all, measure 9, between the left hand of the piano and the cello (starting on beat 3).

Second of all, in measure 11, once again between the left hand of the piano and the cello (between beats 2 and 3).

There are probably other spots, but you should check for things like these and make sure to be careful.

You have tons of parallel fifths, obviously, which can be OK if trying to create a certain texture, but which I don't particularly love in the context of this piece because it ends up making the piano part pretty boring. The whole reason parallel fifths weren't used during the Baroque, Classical, and early Romantic periods was that it undermined the independence of voices and the interest therein. Your piece is pretty similar in the harmonic and rhythmic language to the music of these periods, so I am of the opinion that the same rules apply.

Also, I would once again caution you about having the leading tone too strong in a chord, because it tends to both sound unbalanced and create voice leading problems.

Lastly, your constant use of second inversion chords also undermines the strength of your harmonic movements.

There are some nice things that you created formally and melodically; your weakness continues to be your voice leading practices. I would definitely recommend being more mindful of how your voice leading is affecting the drive of your piece.

Are parallel 5ths/octaves really bad in a string instrument setting though? I thought it was only bad in a choral setting...regardless though, I will take a look at the spots you mentioned since my voice leading isn't too great. :heh:

I highly suggest that you take to heart what deathraider has said.

And no, parallel 5ths and octaves do not just apply to choral music. It applies to all music with harmony...so all music.

Oh, I am...I actually have the score in front of me right now. :P Still trying to figure out what spots are a huge problem, but hopefully I can have it done by tomorrow.

Good luck! :)

I changed the voice leading on a couple of parts. (measure 9, sections of 16-25, a couple spots in the major section) Because I don't want to be falling asleep in orchestra tomorrow, unfortunately the rest has to be done tomorrow. :heh:

So I fixed some more spots, especially some of the chords in the beginning and M. 67-69.

I'm kinda confused about actually finding more of the spots though...in terms of P5/8ths, what exactly do I have to look at? The entire chord and the cello part/other piano hand, or just a note of the chord and the cello part/other piano hand? :heh:

Parallelisms are a little tricky sometimes because voices moving in parallel motion don't always have the same rhythms and stuff and so sometimes they are a little hidden in terms of looking at it (although after a while you develop an ear for them). Parallel 5ths/8ves can be between any two voices (think of each note being played simultaneously as a separate voice) which move at the same time. Does that make sense?

Yeah, that makes sense. That helped when I went back and fixed some more parallels. I left the ones in the beginning because I thought they sounded fine, but other than that I fixed anything else that I thought was a problem.

Here's some things I've been working on. :D

edit: Oh hey. Apparently the other thing I've been working on is still on paper and not on the computer. xD Gotta love when I do that...

I feel like I'm kind of repeating what Deathraider and Mazeppa have said - but I feel like I should: the parallel 5ths/octaves are a problem in your Sonata. The reason is because you're writing a strictly tonal melody - the use of parallel 5ths, especially, tends to diverge from tonal principles. (Could I ask what Theory class you're taking - e.g. first semester, second, etc.?)

If you're in second semester Theory (or at least that's what it is at the University I attend), I would suggest the following process:

1) Isolate the melody.

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/Noname-11.png

2) Put the implied roman numerals in and label potential nonharmonic tones with ( ) .

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/Noname-12.png
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/Bbclarinetist/Noname-13.png

Error: the ii(7) in bar 7 should be a IV(7) instead. The B in bar 9 should be marked with ( ) . The ii (dim) in bar 10 I use as a V instead. The C in 12 should have ( ) .

3) Insert the implied chords as in chorale style. Follow voice leading procedures. (Sorry for any errors - I really rushed on this.)

13217

4) Insert any desired nonharmonic tones. (Yes, I rushed on this too.)

13218

You could probably do a better job than I did. :heh: Opinions will differ on how you harmonize a melody, but use this as a guide.

There's still parallels in that? When I got rid of a lot of them, I literally read the cello and piano part at the same time to make sure there weren't any more parallels...like 3 times. :kfreaked: Could've sworn I got rid of all of them...guess I have something to do over winter break. :heh:

And the theory class I'm taking...not sure what to call it. I'm in the recommended class for freshmen. We basically covered 4 part rules, chord progressions and inversion usage rules, and cadences. I totally had fun in class today BS'ing a music history placement test, ESPECIALLY the essay. XD (which I did on why Vivaldi's concerto grosso in d minor is a baroque piece...lol) Placement tests are pretty interesting when you haven't had any instruction on what is actually on the test.

Ok. This should be better. I left a FEW of the parallels in since I didn't want to change the chord or the inversion, but changed anything else.

Right in the first two measures, you have a doubled (actually tripled) leading tone, parallel fifths, and parallel octaves; I see similar problems in the next two measure after that, and scattered throughout the rest of the piece. I agree with Clarinetist that you should strip it down to the melody and bass line and then voice lead it; it will be easier in the long run than trying to correct voice leading errors in what you've written, especially since you're so used to the score the way it is. Sorry if that's not what you wanted to hear.

Lol, it's ok. I'll just fix it after my finals are done this week. Funny thing is, wasn't even expecting any other comments on the cello thing since I posted a new piece on that post. :P

i heard it... and well, it wasn't what I expected. I remember the very first rough draft of this piece, and it took me by surprise how fluid the transition came to be. I always like 4/4 beat and into something else, especially if it's smooth. I can't really say much after that. I really liked the ending. something I wish I had done.

Ok. This should be a lot better now. I also fixed a few of the chord progressions too. I pretty much spent all of today working on it, so I hope I got it right. :sweat:

To finally comment on the other piece that you posted forever ago ( :P ), I think the accompaniment is too boring. Also, you have parallel fifths again. If you insist on keeping them (it could work), then you need to make sure that you're consistent in using parallel perfect fifths so that it sounds intentional. For example, in measure 17, you have parallel perfect fifths in the first three chords, but then you go to a diminished fifth in the last chord, which kind of ruins the modal sound you have going.

In general, remember that the root position of a vii diminished chord is generally to be avoided in tonal music; it works better to use the first inversion with a doubled third for both voice leading and balance. You still have plenty of parallel fifths in the piano accompaniment of your sonata, by the way. Also, your chord progressions are sometimes very weak. Hopefully you'll learn more about strong chord progressions in theory soon, though.

Boo. I can't comment because your Finale is newer than mine. :P

That's what Finale Reader is for. :)

In general, remember that the root position of a vii diminished chord is generally to be avoided in tonal music; it works better to use the first inversion with a doubled third for both voice leading and balance. You still have plenty of parallel fifths in the piano accompaniment of your sonata, by the way.

Just to support with a bit of logic on why it's like this - note that a diminished triad contains a tritone, which is an unstable interval. For example, C diminished contains C - Eb - Gb. You want to avoid doubling either the C or Gb because they have a tritone and create a sort of instability - that's why usually, to maintain stability, the Eb is placed in the bass (creating the first inversion) and is doubled.

True. The reason that it's bad to double one of the parts in the "unstable" interval is that that interval must resolve a certain way for it to sound right. Therefore, if you double one of the "unstable" notes, you will either have to resolve one of them incorrectly or you will have to resolve them both correctly and create parallel octaves.

Oh, that makes sense now. I'll go back and try to fix it.

But anyway. Here's a song I wrote for this (https://songcontest.nasa.gov/home.aspx) contest. I kinda focused the entire song on background music to go with a sunrise viewed from space. :lol: I made this in garageband, so unfortunately there isn't a score to go with the mp3.

So I fixed the parallel 5th's/octaves up to the end of the second page. I left one in at the end of measure 19 to the beginning of measure 20, and another at the last cadence on the 2nd page because I didn't like the sound of any inversions or alternate chords I tried to put there. :P

I think on "sunrise", the effect is nice. However, I think the sound FX should be used a little more sparingly and that it should be turned down because it started to get really annoying after a little while.

I love that sound effect at 0:43/4 on "Sunrise". I am not too sure of the sound effect falling a lot. You are referring to a sunrise, the FX sounds more like a meteor shower or comet. The chord movement from 0:20 to 0:024 I find it dull, though it does flow. I agree with Deathraider's comment.

http://uploadingit.com/file/wvefjmfb86dpz19h/project+1.wav

There's a little loop I made with the editor for my drum pad. (which is a native instruments maschine btw in case if anyone was wondering) Might end up turning this into an actual piece later, but I don't know. :P

It makes me think of some kind of instrumental 'pop' music. It may be good to turn it in a piece. Making longer these two phrases would work as verse-chorus I think? It has a "danceable" feeling, if that would be the appropriate word to use. And where is the bass?

For some reason I didn't add one. I'll probably go back and add a bass later. My main focus with that was just to learn how to use my drum editor...lol. Actually ended up making something that was kinda cool. :P

http://uploadingit.com/file/0j3ivn0u3sxvnivh/cave.mp3

So there's another one. The idea behind this was some cave part of a video game. Like the caves you would encounter in Link to the Past. Unlike the piece I made on my drum editor though, I actually decided to make this one the "right" way by writing it down and playing it out since I kind of know my way around logic a bit better. :P

Hey guys, I need some opinions on this. So measures 1-13 is where I have my first A section, and after that 14-22 is the B section. From 23-28, would that count as A' since it's in a different time signature with some slightly different chord progressions? I want this movement to be in rondo form, so I hope I'm right in classifying it that way! :heh:

No guys, I'm not dead. XD Anyway, here's something I had to do for composition class. We basically had to use one of Bartok's pieces from mikrokosmos (I chose #40) as a compositional model. I imitated the form and the broken chord-ish stuff going on in the left hand. I might turn this into an actual piece, so I want to see what you guys think of it.

Honestly, the rhythm sounds a little aimless.

What do you mean by aimless? :heh: Is it too random or something?

Yeah. At the beginning, it feels like you're going to go somewhere with it, but it just lacks direction. Things just happen. They slow down and speed up without ever feeling like there's a purpose to it.

Very much so.

Simplify your compositions. Use typical chord progressions. Then from there start to add more to your work.

There's a reason why pop music... is pop music. It's easy to follow and gets stuck in your ear.

Well, I thought adding more motion would solve the problem...I hope I didn't take your advice TOO literally. Also changed the rhythm in some parts of the melody so it made more sense with the new harmony. I legitimately think that I added purpose by making the bass line pretty uniform throughout most of the piece, so please tell me if I'm wrong here. :heh:

I don't know much about bass part... but I do wish that you'd play this song with a harpsichord. Mmmm... haven't heard that instrument in awhile.

I think you need to work on getting more solid harmony. The style you're writing in is rather strict, so you should probably plan things out and stick to traditional progressions as much as possible. Your phrasing is also asymmetrical, which isn't a bad thing in and of itself, but, again, doesn't fit with the style. Some creative stuff in here, though. Keep at it!

I hate to sound like a total retard, but what do you mean by asymmetrical phrasing? :heh: I get what you are saying about some of the chords being non traditional progressions though, so I went back and changed a few.

I'm not exactly sure how to explain. Your musical 'ideas' are usually four beats long, which is pretty normal, but then you change things up at m. 14 (I don't have Sibelius, so I'm just going off of the MIDI). Suddenly, we have an 'idea' that's three beats long, and beat four feels just a little like a cadence, even though it's on an offbeat. The sudden introduction of notes tied across the beat in m. 19-20 also blurs things a little. Basically, you start off with a feel of four, with clear strong and weak beats but then it gets mixed up. Again, not necessarily a bad thing, but it doesn't seem to fit with the style.

Having three bar phrases and other such things is not bad by any means. Neither is having interesting harmonies. If, however, you have an entire piece of four bar phrases and then use a three bar phrase, it sounds out of place and maybe even done on accident, drawing too much attention to itself. Same with inserting complex chords in a context that is unfitting. If you want to use those devices, it is good to use bits and pieces of them sprinkled throughout a piece to prepare the listener's ears (unless you are going for shock value). I'm not talking about your piece specifically but in general. We just talked about this in my comp class and it seemed like it might apply. :)

I see what you're saying about the unequal phrases...now that I think about it, it's one of those things I do without realizing it. :heh: I'll try to edit the piece and post the result later.

Here's another assignment I'm working on for class. We basically had to a compose a short piano piece with similar structure and characteristics to this, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNrwrfj9NOU) but obviously using our own material of course. We also had to use 2 modes, so I chose E dorian and F# phyrigian. The second part of the contrasting period @ m.4-5 might look like an unequal phrase, but I thought I could consider both the same thing since the only difference was the harmony...is it wrong to think of it like that?

i think it's kinda wrong to think of it like that... and my reason behind it is because it's not as smooth as, i'm sure, you want it as to be. Perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps you're planning on doing something that will fix that problem. What did your teacher say?

He basically said that the LH part isn't good or playable, and that I keep presenting ideas with no development in between. Which causes the entire thing to sound like an A section instead of A and B. I've been trying to work on both but I guess it's something I do without really noticing. :heh:

On the unequalness (I INVENTED A WORD! xD) though, is it ok if the amount is uniform throughout? I'm asking because in the piece I posted, the first phrase is 3 measures, and the 2nd is 5 measures in both periods that are in the piece.

I think you should add the fourth bar to your first phrase without a melody playing. That may give a relaxing period to the melody rather than a sudden arrival of its continuation. In other words, give it air.

I never thought to do that...but it seems like it works. Thanks. Is this LH easier for someone to play? I thought this would be a lot easier for somebody to play, but I'm no pianist so some 2nd opinions would be great. :heh:

i think it's super easy to play.

Awesome. But I think the more important question is does it make more musical sense than what I had before? I thought adding a uniform rhythm for each phrase would help it to NOT be all over the place like my teacher was saying. :P

There is not big difference. The main problem I have with this piece is how it lacks interest harmonically and melodically (and it is not really asking about complexity). It would be better to start from zero with a new piece. Unless you really want (or have) to stick with this ones for your assigment.

Yeah, I have to keep this one for an assignment. :heh: What's making it boring though? Would changing some rhythms or note durations in the melody help change that?

Don't worry guys, I'm still alive. Just got busy with school and my portfolio. :heh: Speaking of which, I have the pieces attached if anyone would like to critique them. They are just short piano pieces since that was all the requirements for this semester were, but I'm probably going to turn some of them into an actual piece.

I personally didn't feel much about these compositions. However, I liked the second one. It stuck out the most to me. The rest of them were either boring or just to "mechanical" for me.... like I couldn't relate to it. So ultimately these are my opinions.