1. Didja accidentally blow through the whole, "We're using our real names" thing on registration? No problem, just send me (Mike) a Conversation message and I'll get you sorted, by which I mean hammered-into-obedient-line because I'm SO about having a lot of individuality-destroying, oppressive shit all over my forum.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Discussion areas for the individual classes are unlocked for all users. Let's see if this makes it any more useful. If not, we'll drop this or organize under a single banner to save space and lean things out.
    Dismiss Notice

Scherzo For Woodwinds - Piano Sketch

Discussion in 'Critique & Feedback' started by Mattia Chiappa, Oct 5, 2018.

  1. #1 Mattia Chiappa, Oct 5, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2018
    Hello everybody!

    Following up on one of the recent posts here, I thought I'd try myself to write something in the genre. This was quite a challenge for me and there a few stuff I wasn't able to make work (once you hear the piece, you'll know exactly what I'm talking about :()

    Looking forward to hear your thoughts!

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/cmkbp02p31vq1on/Woodwind Scherzo_Piano Sketch.mp3?dl=0

    Just Woodwinds:
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/np2kxhdkeyapt4h/Scherzo for Woodwinds_NoPerc.mp3?dl=0

    Full Track:
  2. It's pretty good man! Can't wait to hear the orchestrated version. The only big thing that my ear caught is the final descending run - the piece is clearly in minor and you should have used a minor scale instead of a major.

    There's a couple of other moments in the piece where it's not clear whether you're in major or minor, For example at 1:17 you play a very clear Dmaj7 and yet the melody on top is in D minor... I guess you could make this work depending on the context, but in that case (with that Dmajor being so strong) it felt as if you were not in control.
    Mattia Chiappa and Paul T McGraw like this.
  3. @Mattia Chiappa nice piece. Lots of energy. I look forward to hearing it with woodwinds. My one request would be to lengthen the trio. The form of the piece is presently not balanced, which leaves the listener feeling as if the piece is unfinished.

    @Claude Ruelle the major/minor rubs you mentioned do not bother me. In fact I sort of enjoyed it, like a little spice in the dish.
    Mattia Chiappa likes this.
  4. Whoa..... you look so different when not behind the bass (or guitar ?)
    Rohann van Rensburg likes this.
  5. #5 Doug Gibson, Oct 6, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2018

    I don't know man. I don't get it ...... at all. Now before I go into it, please know I am trying to be an asshole. Ask my wife: she will tell you I just have so much practice at being one that mastery comes effortlessly to me now.

    The thing that somewhat baffles me the most, is hearing this as a piano reduction. I mean if it was the orchestration that was a problem........ wait..... this is more to the point.

    I am surprised that the piece is already "orchestrated" even though it has not been orchestrated.

    Clearly what you have done is listen to some woodwind only pieces (M.V in particular) and transcribed some of them.

    You know, and I just got say it because for me it's my honest thought, I never understood the minor triads descending in Mike's piece. It always seemed out of place to me, and such a direct quote of Williams. It was always where I felt the piece just falls to the ground 100% like a house of cards, or being put on hold. It had nothing to do with what came before or after in the demo. I bring that up, as you quote it and try and run with it. So it becomes like a "Fruit Cake" or musical "re-gift".
    You are quoting Verta, who is quoting Williams, who is quoting Grieg.

    Don't do that. (transcribing woodwind pieces to make one)
    Not that the strategy is inherently flawed, but in this case it is cutting of tons of your musicality.
    You have much more to say than this.
    Just write a piece. Write something you really like. Then orchestrate it.


    Take a piece you have already composed that you really like. Now orchestrate THAT for woodwinds.
    That will be 10x's more successful. Don't write new material yet for them. It's pulling you too much.

    If you want, I can go thru the what and why of where you piece makes me go WTF, but I think you already know this, and can tell from your comments.

    I mean you have at least three different pieces in there. I have no idea what the hell happened at 1:04. Did you turn the radio dial ?

    You are now at a high level of composing, and so I think you need to watch out as things get a little trickier.
    You are going to get a lot of "likes" with no matter what you post.
    This is where one must learn "self-teaching". Not that you will know all the answers
    from now on, but filter out who to seek guidance from, and sort thru what is valid/not.

    BTW.... I am not saying you should listen to me. Not at all.

    If you don't have anything of your own you feel you want to arrange, arrange a cover you really like.

    The point is : Is the foundation of the song is really song, you can't go too far wrong.
    Example of this below:

    Or plan B. Why not just write a tune and include one or two max, woodwinds that will explore to understand how to write for. Something real simple

  6. Hey Doug thanks for sharing your great insides!

    Your recent posts here seems to be in the same vibe. I wasn't gonna say anything but let's talk about this!

    Sorry, I don't quite get it, I'm getting some mixed signals here. I do what I do, the way I do it, only because I'm trying to practice what Mike teaches in his classes and I post here because I want to get better. That was the whole point of the forum I think. I'm certainly not looking for praising or trying to please people I don't know. If what I write is not your cup of tea by all means, I respect that. We all have different tastes and that's great!

    What confuses me is the rest of your answer. It seems to me, what upsets you the most is the method more than anything else. Again, I am merely applying what Mike teaches in his classes. It's taken me years of hard work to get used to it and I feel like I've only begun to scratch the surface now. Sorry, I don't think I'm ready nor I should give that up. What would be the reward price anyway?

    About 1:04 ahahahah. You made me laugh so hard. Yes I agree that could have been handled better.
  7. #7 Alexander Schiborr, Oct 6, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2018
    Its early here, so let me just have my coffee before I go swimming lol :D
    I shouldn´t do reviews in my vacation time however, I like the piece. I restructured it a bit, kicked some stuff out, cutted waves and yeah..just use things what you like and dismiss everything you find shitty. Thank you.


    Sure you have a bit to work that out because I couldn´t do anything about right voicing, alter ranges and transitions but I think you get the idea?
  8. Wow! That was amazing Alex, thank you! I really hope it didn't you take too long to do this.

    There's a plenty I like and I yes I see exactly your point. It feels a lot cleaner and less like an improv. The structure makes much more sense and even the major moment in the middle somehow feels more cohesive with the rest of the piece now. I wish I knew how to fix this stuff on my own but this is actually helpful, thank you Alex!
    Alexander Schiborr likes this.
  9. No problem at all mate. Took me 30 minutes.
    Paul T McGraw and Mattia Chiappa like this.
  10. Hey Mattia,

    I like what you did here. I like that you don't really repeat your material. Instead you always change the harmonics and your melody. I never got bored, so good work. BUT, there are some things I noticed:

    1. the major/minor "rubs" or descending/ascending lines (especially the final major line) sometimes feel out of place and don't work for me in context with the overall piece, so some little adjustment here could fix that confusion.

    2. the part at 1:04, yeah, I am with Doug on that, it's a totally different piece. I know what you are trying to do here, but I guess you should work on that part and try to replace it with something that actually uses parts of your original idea in order to make it a cohesive piece of music. Always remember, everything you need is already in your original idea.

    3. The descending minor triads: yeah, just cut it out, you don't need this "Williams" quotation. I've heard it too many times now in so many pieces, I think Doug has already said everything you need to know about it, just leave it out.

    Overall, I like the structure and developing of your piece. I think if you do some adjustments it will be a nice magical bit for woodwinds, hope you have a good woodwind library to make it work. ;)
  11. #11 Rohann van Rensburg, Oct 8, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2018
    Also, the reason why this seems to come up is because:

    Consider this part well!

    For the record I have no commentary on your piece as it's well above my writing ability and I echo the like and recommendations of what a few others have posted. Just my impression of what Doug wrote, as we tend to miss the intent and core of what people say on forums (especially when our work is on the line).
    Mattia Chiappa likes this.
  12. Alright, so after a few more days of work on this, I managed to make it even worse and now it's a complete shameful mess :(. I was tired and frustrated by the piece, so I orchestrated the original idea, this way I can move to something else. I'll put a link below if you wanna take a listen.

    Thanks again everybody for all the wonderful advice!

  13. Nice work ! Bravo !
    Mattia Chiappa likes this.
  14. Man, if this is a shameful mess then I'm doomed. It sounds great orchestrated.
    What I haven't figured out how to deal with is "piece burnout", other than just walking away from it for a while. Being relatively new and frequently frustrated, this leads me to feeling burnt out from music in general as I feel like I never actually get to finish a piece.
    Matthias Calis likes this.
  15. It is very nice and well orchestrated. Don´t be too hard with yourself. This piece is millions times better than the average epic dude braam makes with production music. It is really nice and I enjoyed it. Just head on creating cool music like that.
  16. Seriously. Better than the generic sound in a lot of film too, for the record.

    Feedback and critique can get tiring, but bear in mind the highpoint of what was said here: You'e reaching a high level of composing, such that in "trying to write something" as an exercise you will impress most people, including fellow composers. That' a big deal. I think the end goal of this forum is to push people beyond even "good" into "great", the only meaningful competition being against yourself.
  17. I feel you man! I'm in there with you too, I wish there was a workaround but I learned that the quickest I get, the less I hate the music in the end. The problem is often time I'm compromising quality. Because of this, I often feel like giving up on a new piece, so over the last year or so I've been forcing myself to complete each single project no matter what. It's frightening, over time I've collected hundreds and hundreds of sketches and unfinished projects never looking back.
  18. It sounds great Mattia! Could we hear a version without the Piano, Harp and Perc?
  19. Claude Ruelle likes this.

Share This Page