Attached are 6 pieces for piano; their sequencer mp3s and their scores. I had worked on them for some time, on and off, but only recently did I try my hand at transcribing them to score. As usual, I have no idea how these (except No. 5) sound on a real piano, but I have tried my best to fuse different genres together (such as easy listening and jazz) in a classical mold. Hopefully you will enjoy them; comments on both music and score much appreciated.

Note: Two of the preludes I have posted before in a previous topic, but they have been modified slightly to make them more pianistic.

Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW9sLkyQ35U

What are ".rar" files?

Notwithstanding Google, not everybody knows what a RAR file is

Please stick to ZIP files, which everybody can read. Recent Windows versions even have zip support built-in.

Also, when you have scores, do not post them as JPG files for each page. Use PDFCreator or a similar tool to provide a score as a PDF file, which is the default format for scores. If you don't know how to do this, I'll be happy to help.

Ah, it makes much more sense that way; thanks for the advice. Yup, made the necessary changes already, the .zip file is available for download.

Jon,
I've just listened to your 6 Preludes and followed with the score. You have real talent. I like much of what I heard, especially nos 3, 4 and 6. The others were not as successful for me. The way no.1 opened was excellent but as it developed it seem to lose direction for me. Of No.5 I would say this, would you consider raising the basso melody an octave? The problem where it is, as you may know, is that the differences in frequencies of the low pitches are not as great as in the higher pitches, therefore, the ear has a more difficult time distinguishing a lot of detail down there (note the harmonic overtone series, and why you never see a closed position triad "down there," unless of course the intent is for tone clusters). I think No.5 would be more successful if you brought that interesting melody up out of the "muddy waters" of the bass of the piano. I personally would consider learning nos, 3, 4, and 6!

Best wishes,
Eddy

BTW: What is the cryptic "L I M I N"?

I had a listen to "Moderato" Interesting how the piece starts 4/4 and then goes to 15/16 with sixteenth notes spaced with rests throughout the measure, makes the piece kind of mechanical to my ears.

I liked "presto," there were parts were I almost was sure you ripped off Kapustin's wonderful F Major which a very technically adept player dropped in the audition room somewhile back. IS Kapustin an influence of yours?

I like your expression marking "with painful nostalgia" maybe I wasn't following allow o.k with the midi but I didn't get a gripping sense of this.

What you seem to do well is creating atonal scales, ala carte Bartok, what you could work on is slowing down some of these compositions. I do not think Marc-Andre Hamelin could pick up these pieces and play 'em like twinkle twinkle star. But perhaps you are going for electronic simulations rather than playable pieces?

ps. on the bottom of p.6 it reads limin between the staffs. What does this mean?!?

@musical-md: Thanks for the praise; what I thought about when composing the preludes was about the two dimensions to them; the eastern-like easy-listening kitsch on one hand (e.g No.2 and No.5) and the classical jazz on the other (No.4 and No.6). No.1 was meant to be a kind of quick overview between these two sides, with the opening being that of the 'classical' side, the middle being a constantly interrupted 'pop side' and the second last section being a 'painful' fusion of the two. I can understand that the constant bashing in the low register is quite counter-productive though, as well as the 'quasi cadenza' which made it seem a bit aimless... it might not sound very well on the piano due to the above two.

As for No.5, I will try it out; thanks for the advice. But does this apply to the opening section or the entire piece?

Also, I'm quite happy to see your interest in trying them out, but beware since these were composed on the computer without reference to the keyboard, which might mean that they might not fit nicely under the fingers at all. If you do give them a try, do you mind telling me if they are playable, unplayable, and if they sound 'right' on the piano? Thanks.

---

@pianoman342:

The 15/16 and the 17/16 comes from the play with downbeats and upbeats in No.4, I suppose. There is a kind of pontillism to the notes there... which might make it some mechanical.

As for Kapustin, I have only heard of his 8 Concert Etudes... but which F Major piece of his are you referring to? I might have been influenced by him, come to think of it, but I think it might have been more subconscious than conscious. As for difficulty; I would love for these to be played on a real piano (I used electronic simulations but in the hope of arriving at the real thing). I'm sure Hamelin could pick these up if he wanted very much to, though I doubt he could sight-read...

As for LIMIN, it's a name. Kind of a personal thing though.

These sound as good as I remember them. They look pretty playable too. The scores rather look like those by Kapustin.
I am sure Hamelin could not only sightread this, but give a note-perfect performance first time. You should actually approach him with these.

Not sure what wonderful Kapustin F major is referred to here either ...

Edit: You way want to create the PDF so that the pages are the right way up. Doesn't matter when you print it, but would look better on the screen

@technuet and affinity

I mean Kapustin's Prelude in F major, Op. 53 No. 23.

What I heard from measures 28-34 in your "presto reminded me of the part in Kapustin's piece.

If you scroll to 1:11 in the video below you might agree. The difference being that you have scale runs in the left hand and Kapustin does a 2/4 swingy ragtime type arrangement in the left. Here is the video:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gv3ZLN0pyVI

Yes and yes. Wherever you have such melodic interest that low in pitch.

@pianoman: Interesting, but I don't hear the similarity. There's the same descending chord progression, but everything else seems quite different, including the melody. Besides, that phrase seems quite common in a lot of jazz music, including other Kapustin pieces and improvisatory jazz.

This is some good stuff. You have a lot of great ideas and have put them together well in general. I'm going to print them out and try them.

One thing that I noticed, and others have commented on to some extent, is that they are all very bass heavy. While for specific purposes that is o.k. if performed as a set it does get a little annoying. Even with single notes in the bass, you have to be very careful with pedaling (which problem showed up in one of the slower ones where the pedals weren't clean.) One thing to consider if you want to keep a strong bass presence is to transpose them up a 3rd or 5th. This will keep the bass strong in in the bass range yet clean up some of the issues.

Also, intervals other than octave or 5th much below the C below mid C might as well be minor seconds because of the nature of the overtones, as Eddy brought up. This is fine for special effects, such as percussive type sounds that occur in no. 1 and to me work ok.

The other thing in no. 1 that you might consider is balancing all of that lowness with your lyrical melody in the meno mosso section working up an octave higher, maybe in octaves.

No. 2 I think would be successful in the hands of a human. To me it needs a slower tempo and to feel less metrically precise, which I am sure is an issue of working on the computer and relying on it for playback. You have it at about quarter = 60, It would probably be better around 50 or so, more of a lento than an andante and would give more of "melancholique" spirit (Lento [or in French "lent"] would also make more sense as a term to combine with "melancholique". It is also one that you might consider trying it about a minor 3rd higher, making your lowest note the F below the C below bass clef instead of the D.

No. 3 is pure BeBop (a shoo bop a bop --- oh well, I'll stop singing). Here again, I would like to hear the right hand venture further up the keyboard. In this piece your L.H. has some wonderful nearly 4 octave sweeps in a single gesture. The R.H. never really ventures that far in its fast moments. Similar sweeps upward or downward from the top would add balance and give added import to that short lyrical that is firmly grounded in the center of the piano -- the voice of reason trying to reign in two opposing forces that have no center to their thought.

no. 4 This is another one that I think might be more successful up a step or two.

no. 5 This is bottom heavy. You have a great bass melody that looses clarity because of its range. An octave higher or a transposition of the whole piece would be beneficial. I also believe that a slower, more fluid tempo might be more in keeping with the "Lamentoso" spirit (again, I understand that the computer doesn't understand espressivo like a human does). Another thing that you might consider (particularly if you use a slower tempo) is to let the accompaniment 16ths rhythmically modulate, possibly into sextuplets and then into 32nds. This would add more intensity without actually increasing the tempo.

no. 6 This is another one that would possibly be more successful transpose up a little so that it isn't so bottom heavy and also allow the R.H. to venture further away from the center.

As I said at the start, there is good stuff here. Also, from what I hear and what I see without actually sitting at the piano, they actually sound pianistic with piano type figures and passages. Are you a pianist? Often, composers not totally familiar with a particular instrument will create things that come off more as transcriptions from another instrument that the composer may be more familiar with -- such as writing for a violin but actually writing more flute-like passages. Even some well know composers did this. I believe that it was Bruckner(? I may have the wrong one) wrote for orchestra (and wonderful stuff) as if it was a transcription from a romantic organ piece since he (or at least the one I'm thinking of) was an organist first. If you are not a pianist by nature, you appear to have a good basic understanding of the instrument (other than the bass thing .

Keep up the good work and I look forward to hearing and seeing more of you compositions.

Scott

Well, I don't understand Jazz very well. In fact, it's not a style I like very much, so I don't feel able to make considerable comments on your work. Exceptionally, No. 5 is what I'm used to hear, and is inside my listening habits, and I can tell you it is just brilliant. It is wonderful the way you change the position of the main melody from bottom to top unexpectedly. This one I'd say I'll try to play myself.

Althoug my lack of knowledge on the style of the other preludes, some of them remembered me of when I used to play videogames and there was a battle. The music is very similar! I liked remembering it.

At last, it may sound a bit traditionalist, but some passages sounded quite messy and chaotic. I know many things weren't exactly the way you wanted because it's a computer, but some parts doesn't seem to be so different if played by a human. Maybe I change my mind if I hear a human performance of some of these pieces.

Anyway, you're talended!