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. You're only as good as the harshest criticism you're willing to hear.
    Dismiss Notice

Waltzin' Romance - Melody Practice

Discussion in 'Critique & Feedback' started by Mattia Chiappa, Feb 14, 2019.

  1. #1 Mattia Chiappa, Feb 14, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2019
    Hello people!

    Since it's so hard to write good melodies, I used to neglect this part and overcompensate with over the top orchestrations and cheap arranging tricks to make the piece more engaging than it really is. Useless to say, this doesn't quite work. In the end, no matter how interesting the exposition is, people lose focus if you have nothing to say.

    I find this very frustrating but I've been trying to get better. I've tried quite a few permutations before coming up with the melody you hear. The B Section is a completely different beast. That's where I often feel vulnerable and lost.

    Am I on the right path?

    Orchestration:


    Piano solo:
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Did you have piano sketch?
     
  3. John Eldridge likes this.
  4. #4 Alexander Schiborr, Feb 14, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2019
    Can it be that you added quite some stuff like counterpoints and additional lines which are entirerly not part of your composition? I say that because some stuff are distracting me. Like right in the beginning that bassoons which is not even part of your composition? You are not foccusing on your melody and considering your orchestration in the beginning build around that. While in your piano I can follow your melody, it gets buried by the orchestration as you mush it all over it. Also your melody is caried by what? By the harp of the strings? its all chaos there. You should really do the following and make a rough sketch first what carries what: Melody, chords, bass. And then you can after you are done do fillers and ornamental stuff. The way how you go here doesn´t sound good because the orchestration is just not focussed. Don´t be afraid just to set mainlines for melody, chords, bass first , and make them clear..dont´mush them all together. Thats the problem imo here with the orchestration a lot and which makes the piece in the end..not shine though I like your piano idea.
     
  5. I had a hard time to get the rythm of the melody in the A section but after listening to the piano sketch that shit is fucking stuck in my head. Good job. ;)
     
    Mattia Chiappa likes this.
  6. #6 Rohann van Rensburg, Feb 14, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2019
    I'd have to agree with Alexander. Your piano sketch was fantastic, I really enjoyed it. Enough so that I'll go back and listen to it a few times again. Still in my head. I think the issue is in the orchestration and adding too much too early.

    What I've been doing lately is trying to limit myself to a particular section, or a predefined collection of instruments. I find it's helping my focus a lot -- I'm not sure if that's what you envisioned for this piece, but I could see it working well with i.e. only strings (plus harp for emphasis and arpeggios, etc). Or only strings and one or two winds, etc (you've kind of already done that so take it with a grain of salt). I'm not sure if you're a Joe Hisaishi fan but his orchestration might be something worth drawing from. Thinking maybe of the Nausicaa suite.
     
    Mattia Chiappa likes this.
  7. Actually...do you have notation for the piano sketch? Transcribing it and want to make sure I got some of the voicings correct.
     
  8. Thank you guys for the feedback, it's good to know I'm at least consistent with my mistakes :)
    That's what I do, I don't know how I still manage to over orchestrate somehow. Part of the problem is when I'm sketching the idea I can hear parts that I can't physically play (like countermelodies and flourishes) which end up being in the orchestration. This seems to be reoccurring quite often and amazingly I still struggle to hear it in my pieces, funnily enough I have no trouble calling it on other people. I guess I'll have try harder to stick to what I actually played. I glad to know you guys at least enjoyed the melody.
    No I don't but I'll put something together for you. I'll be on it soon
     
    Rohann van Rensburg likes this.
  9. I've attached the score here, it's nothing fancy but you'll get the idea. I hope you'll find it useful!
     

    Attached Files:

    Rohann van Rensburg likes this.
  10. Fantastic, thank you!
     
  11. I listened to the original post once and the piano sketch like six times. Does it need more for it to say what you mean for it to say? It's not just that the sketch stands on its own, which is a good sign, but it felt like piano was the right voice for the job. Really enjoyed it.
     
    Mattia Chiappa likes this.
  12. Yeah I'm the same here. I've listened to the piano piece probably 5 times today.
     
  13. #13 Raphael Badawi, Feb 16, 2019
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2019
    Olivier Calmel once told me face to face that the most difficult thing to achieve with orchestration is resonance. And I think that's what's missing in the arrangement. Some register issues (for instance this chanterelle register at the cello at the beginning). But some very nice ideas; good woodwinds writing, the bridges at 1:20 and 1:40 sound good to my ears. The focus line may have been arranged more in front, but it would be an exaggerated assumption to state it's buried (WTF?!) under the rest. It's not about who carries the melody, it's more like "is it thickened enough or dynamically contrasted enough to cut through?". The tonality is clear, the chords are clear, I like the composition, but like everybody here I prefer the piano sketch.

    Nevertheless, there are some nice devices and a lot of potential in the arrangement, and even if it's a bit confusing sometimes, it's globally clear and easy to follow to me (and to my girlfriend, so that makes two of us). The main problem for me is a lack of body and presence ( = resonance). The register issues. And also this precipitated and frustrating ending.
     
    Mattia Chiappa likes this.
  14. Thank you all for sharing your opinions. Since it seems that everybody preferred the sketch rather than the orchestrated version I cleaned it up a bit and made a "proper" piano version. I've attached links to the music and the score on the top.
     
    Alexander Schiborr likes this.
  15. I am looking forward to your overworked orchestrated track as well, hope you are still working on it. :)
     
  16. Very nice to listen, it's good time spent listening this.

    – The pizzicato are a bit strange, I don't know if it's a sound vst that I don't like or because they are too loud.. maybe you could double with something and use less note for pizzicato, because in that part I think it's too much.

    What is it, 6/8? I would put pizzicatos only on the 2nd and 3th of those 6/8.

    – Betweek 1,04 and 1,11 it's a bit too much strange passage.

    – Since you used always strings would be a good and nice idea to use horns for melody at 0,37
     

Share This Page