Equilibrium for Orchestra and Piano (2007, revised 2008)
Download mp3 - 14MB
Download pdf score
Sorry for the big download file, but hopefully it will be worth it for you.
Any comments are appreciated!
Printable View
Equilibrium for Orchestra and Piano (2007, revised 2008)
Download mp3 - 14MB
Download pdf score
Sorry for the big download file, but hopefully it will be worth it for you.
Any comments are appreciated!
I really like the piano in that. How long did that take you to write?
Thanks, Flinte.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flinte
The original version of the piece probably took about 4 or 5 months at about 15 hours/week, including preparing both the printed score and recording. The revision was another six weeks, but was worked on only a bit at a time.
Well the song definitely shows how much time you put into that. What programs do you use? Notepad?
For sequencing I use Sonar 7 Producer Edition.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flinte
The libraries are:
Garritan Personal Orchestra (most instruments)
Garritan Jazz and Big Band (trumpets and 2 of 3 trombones)
Garritan Steinway Piano
And one other percussion sample from the Kontakt library.
For notation, I use Sibelius 5.
Wow you have quite a setup going there, and here I am stuck with Fruity Loops haha. Have you ever listened to Joe Hiashi? Your work reminds me of his.
i use fruity loops... it sucks but i still can't do anything with anything else cause i never take the time to learn reason or cubase or live which are all much better suited to what i do.
and that song was very well thought out. you seem to have considered everything.
I don't know Joe Hiashi. I'll see if I can track some down.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flinte
Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by lysergic
Fruity Loops is good for somethings, like Electronica. If you want more control, you should concentrate on your cubase, which is a respectable sequencer. Of course the sample library you use makes a ton of difference as well.
yo, Just downloading it now. Looking forward to it. Ill let you know what I thought, once its arrived at my PC and i've given it a few listens.
c ya
Where did you get your inspiration from and how does your composition represent equilibrium?
I'm inspired by a lot of composers, and some pop music as well. This work probably shows a lot of my love for Prokofiev, Shostakovich, Stravinsky, Debussy, among others.Quote:
Originally Posted by gagaku
The "equilibrium" of the piece is expressed in a number of ways, though it is very abstracted. One aspect is the sharing of ideas between the piano and the orchestra -- I have called this work a "non-concerto" because it does not feature the piano so much as allow it to share the stage with the rest of the orchestra.
There are other "balances" throughout the structure, such as breaking the work into two main sections, and having the shorter section be a bit "weightier." Each section is also of two main parts: a first one with more rhythm and motion, and a second with more rich harmony and long, arching themes.
There are many more aspects that went through my head as I wrote, but most of them are too nebulous to explain very well.
I really enjoyed it Skysaw. I cant put words to what I think, Its hard to describe this type of music as I have not listened up on it too much. Definately like the idea of non-concerto
I found it opened with a light mood, and even though playful, I couldnt feel a logical sense of progression. Thats not meant to be insulting at all, btw. I thought it was clever how it was free of form. Obviously, you know its structure but to me it sounded cleverly abstract.
The second half was just as interesting, but a little less abstract.I liked the string swells.
Sounds like you put alot of effort into it, and to making it harmonically pleasant. I cant even determine what sort of scales you stuck too.
Very enjoyable, d'like to hear it with a live orchestra/piano.
Hi James,Quote:
Originally Posted by james-25:22pm
Thanks for listening and commenting. I especially appreciate that you took the time to reply even though it was not a style you are much familiar with.
I've always had a very non-traditional view of structure, which I think is pretty obvious here. My structures tend to build up organically during the composition process, and are usually fairly fractured, hidden, and with lots of overlapping pieces of the puzzle. I don't expect anyone to easily latch onto the hidden lattice that holds it together, but rather get a sense that it all belongs together and grows in a natural progression. I like to think of it as someone viewing a natural structure, such as a mountain range. It all belongs together, but dividing it up into neat sections is almost impossible.Quote:
I found it opened with a light mood, and even though playful, I couldnt feel a logical sense of progression. Thats not meant to be insulting at all, btw. I thought it was clever how it was free of form. Obviously, you know its structure but to me it sounded cleverly abstract.
That's probably because when I do use scales, I don't tend to stick to them. :) Most of my music would be classified as "tonal," but that doesn't mean it fits within expected harmonies or progressions. I use a lot of what I like to think of as "suggested" chords, where I take away notes where I can, and add in a few new ones, so that just the glimmer of the original chord function remains.Quote:
The second half was just as interesting, but a little less abstract.I liked the string swells.
Sounds like you put alot of effort into it, and to making it harmonically pleasant. I cant even determine what sort of scales you stuck too.
A good example that's easy to see is the last woodwind chord of the first section. It falls on page 30 and at 5:40 in the mp3 if you want to take a look. It's a chord that suggests we might be in F major, but the notes are F, G, Bb, B, C, E. Much of the melody and harmony of the entire work is based on the notes F, C, E, and here I just added a sort of inside-out transposition of those three notes on top (G, Bb, B). The clash of the B-flat and B-natural are what gives this chord that little bit of bite, but it is softened by the dynamics and by splitting the close notes between different instruments. (Different textures always help minimize the "edge" of a dissonance).
I would too!Quote:
Very enjoyable, d'like to hear it with a live orchestra/piano.
Thanks again.
Great stuff!
I enjoyed the fractured feel of the first half of the piece, the textures that kept popping up here and there.
Those light piano arpeggios half-way through sound almost jazzy, especially with that brass behind them.
The end was brilliant too, with those strings, the percussive tones that wind down in the piano.
I can't help but respect the amount of time and effort that must have gone into creating something like this. I know from my own endeavours how much patience and dedication is required to try and compose a relatively uncomplicated piece of music, but one like this would have driven me nuts. So kudos for that, and for making it work and sound really good.