Saul's Music Space

[Saul]

As I said earlier, Saul, you really seem to have been upset by my use of the word insulted earlier - you've mentioned it many times since then, and I can see it agrieves you, so I am sorry about that.

I did already try to explain to you what I meant by it, and it wasn't what you have repeatedly said, as you did just now - that I was insulted by your music. What I said was, my musical intelligence feels insulted when it is asked to read and decipher something that doesn't make sense notationally, with a view to playing the piece. I'm not talking about the sound of the music here, I'm talking from a performer's perspective about the feeling of frustration you get when you expect one thing and get another. There is, I think, something implied in posting one's music online, and it's this: 'here is my piece, I have worked hard on it for you, the listener and, in the case of the score, for you, the performer, I have made sure that all is legible, that the notation fits the sense of the music so that you won't have to do any unnecessary deciphering'. But when I see one of your scores, Saul, the impression I get is more 'here is my piece, I hope you like the sound of it, but because I like the sound it makes when I press play, I'm not that bothered by how it looks for you if you are going to try to play it yourself'. That feeling is a little unpleasant for the performer, it feels a little disrespectful, as if you are telling them that they don't really matter. And it would be so easily solved with the notational scrub-up I've advised.

Listening to your pieces I don't feel insulted, Saul, even if they aren't to my taste. It's only as a potential performer that your scores give off that feeling that you don't really care about me (  )

Luke,

I will not respond to you now, even though I want to, because I want to respect Mike's request for giving this topic a break for now...

Let's talk about something else, there are other things on this site that should be also interesting besides my Music!

[(poco) Sforzando]

Well, I don't see why Saul should have all the fun. Responding to the Competition for a Baroque piece, here's something I wrote around 1996, which is probably the last year I composed anything. A friend wanted to learn the piano but only had a 49-key Casio, so I thought of writing 10 Easy Pieces for a Casio Keyboard. Only problems were (a) I made the pieces much too hard; (b) I got frustrated with the range and stuck a high D in the piece I'm uploading here. This little Adagio, #5 in the suite, is a kind of 2-part invention in the Baroque spirit and obviously has the E major 2-part invention of Bach on its mind. It could also be played as a duet for 2 cellos. I have no way of recording this, but it shouldn't be beyond the average pianist, and the score shows you also the Bartokian #4 that leads into it.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Sfz, that looks like fun!  I'll print it out and try it at home later. I'm currently working my way thru the 2-Part Inventions, so this piece looks like a natural to try next.

[Luke]

Well, I don't see why Saul should have all the fun. Responding to the Competition for a Baroque piece, here's something I wrote around 1996, which is probably the last year I composed anything. A friend wanted to learn the piano but only had a 49-key Casio, so I thought of writing 10 Easy Pieces for a Casio Keyboard. Only problems were (a) I made the pieces much too hard; (b) I got frustrated with the range and stuck a high D in the piece I'm uploading here. This little Adagio, #5 in the suite, is a kind of 2-part invention in the Baroque spirit and obviously has the E major 2-part invention of Bach on its mind. It could also be played as a duet for 2 cellos. I have no way of recording this, but it shouldn't be beyond the average pianist, and the score shows you also the Bartokian #4 that leads into it.

Fabulous to see some of your music!  I could try to record it later, as I did that piece of Karl's, if you trust me. For illustration only, of course.

The two-part nature of your piece reminded me of one of my own not-worth-the-paper-or-ink pieces, also written with older music at the back of my mind, though in this case it was medieval music, and particularly ars subtilis pieces by e.g. and esp. Matteo da Perugia. This one was written in about 20 minutes. I find it quite moving, in its brittleness and with those little recurrent 'fragile' trills that come again and again, each time played with pedal..but I think that is because I am aware that a few hours after writing this piece (summer 2005) I suffered a bit of a nervous breakdown...

This is it, anyway. Funnily enough, when I posted it on my own thread, Eugene listened to it and wrote what is I think the only somewhat negative review of a piece I've had, before Saul's. But I didn't mind, because Eugene is an exceptionally sensitive listener. What he actually said was (comparing this piece to another small one which he had enjoyed more):

The Unfinished Study had too many notes for my taste and frankly seemed the product of a less concentrated session? However, the ending was fabulous .... [and in another post]....You know Luke, I am transcribing some interviews with some tamil refugees these days using a very meticulous transcription convention which means it takes a full working day to transcribe 15 minutes of conversation. So whenever I've had too much (of traumatic stories), I put my work away and listen to your work, which makes me very tranquil. I think this is part of the reason why I happened to like X better than the Unfinished Study - possibly picking up on the tumultous undertones lurking in the shadows (the more sun the more shadows). The story behind the piece was intense but it made me want to go back and listen to the piece again. Call me morbid.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Fabulous to see some of your music!  I could try to record it later, as I did that piece of Karl's, if you trust me. For illustration only, of course.

Thank you, Luke. Of course I trust you. I'll try yours later when I get a chance, too.

Looking at Sfz3.jpg, something doesn't look right at the start of the second system. I think that should have been A_ G# A G# F#. I'll check tonight when I get home, but I may have messed up something in the Finale file.

[karlhenning]

Fun stuff, Sfz! Thanks for posting this.

[Saul]

I composed this work for Piano & Orchestra about 5 years ago. I was inspired to write the music after I viewed Monet's Painting titled 'Magpie'.
I thought the painting to be magnificent, moving and thought provoking.

I provided the score for download.

Best,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/KS3-JiHHsKo

[(poco) Sforzando]

I composed this work for Piano & Orchestra about 5 years ago. I was inspired to write the music after I viewed Monet's Painting titled 'Magpie'.
I thought the painting to be magnificent, moving and thought provoking.

I provided the score for download.

Best,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/KS3-JiHHsKo

Rossini has The Thieving Magpie; Saul has The Painting Magpie. (Typo corrected.)

[Szykneij]

Apologies to all if I've been either annoying or frustratingly but pointlessly persistent on this thread. 

No need for apologies as far as I'm concerned, Luke. I've been following this discussion and I've found your remarks to be informative and insightful. I've learned a few things along the way.

[karlhenning]

No need for apologies as far as I'm concerned, Luke. I've been following this discussion and I've found your remarks to be informative and insightful. I've learned a few things along the way.

Hear, hear.

[Saul]

Rossini has The Thieving Mapie; Saul has The Painting Magpie.

You mean to say the Thieving Magpie not Mapie...

[(poco) Sforzando]

You mean to say the Thieving Magpie not Mapie...

It was a typo. And you meant to say "You meant to say," not "You mean to say."

[Saul]

It was a typo. And you meant to say "You meant to say," not "You mean to say."

http://www.youtube.com/v/G1jLOWIxFIQ

[(poco) Sforzando]

http://www.youtube.com/v/G1jLOWIxFIQ

Don't you understand the difference between present and past tense? I would suggest you not try to play one-upmanship games with me in the use of the English language, Saul. I have a Ph.D. in English from Rutgers University, I taught college writing and literature for twelve years, and I am now a professional technical writer and editor.

And I would certainly like to know what Bruce saw fit to edit . . . .

[bhodges]

And I would certainly like to know what Bruce saw fit to edit . . . .

I reduced the size of the video.  Rob suggests a flash size of "425,350" rather than "700,500".

--Bruce

[PaulR]

I composed this work for Piano & Orchestra about 5 years ago. I was inspired to write the music after I viewed Monet's Painting titled 'Magpie'.
I thought the painting to be magnificent, moving and thought provoking.

I provided the score for download.

Best,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/KS3-JiHHsKo

Hey Saul,
Measure 39, the low F# isn't playable on the bass.  You might also want to think about changing the low B's, (as well as the low C#s), because, in theory, it would work (by either having a 5-string bass where the low string is a B, or having a C string extension, but I don't think a lot of the lower-tier orchestras have the extensions).   

I also think you should use marks like "divisi" in measure 34.   I'm not sure if that's you intended or not, but if you wanted the basses to play those 3 notes at once, it won't be the best outcome.  It might be (barely) playable, but you won't get the clarity you want.

[Saul]

Hey Saul,
Measure 39, the low F# isn't playable on the bass.  You might also want to think about changing the low B's, (as well as the low C#s), because, in theory, it would work (by either having a 5-string bass where the low string is a B, or having a C string extension, but I don't think a lot of the lower-tier orchestras have the extensions).   

I also think you should use marks like "divisi" in measure 34.   I'm not sure if that's you intended or not, but if you wanted the basses to play those 3 notes at once, it won't be the best outcome.  It might be (barely) playable, but you won't get the clarity you want.

Thank you , you're right on everything you said.
This is really silly , because the instrumental Ranges page is rite in front of me...I should have been more careful.

Thank you again for pointing out.

Regards,

Saul

[(poco) Sforzando]

Thank you, Luke. Of course I trust you. I'll try yours later when I get a chance, too.

Looking at Sfz3.jpg, something doesn't look right at the start of the second system. I think that should have been A_ G# A G# F#. I'll check tonight when I get home, but I may have messed up something in the Finale file.

I was right - that A# looked suspicious. I uploaded a corrected copy of Sfz3.jpg with the right pitches. And I decided I could live with a B natural instead of a D, to keep the piece within a 49-key range.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Thank you , you're right on everything you said.
This is really silly , because the instrumental Ranges page is rite in front of me...I should have been more careful.

Thank you again for pointing out.

Regards,

Saul

There are a lot more problems with the orchestration than that. Just for starters, try to figure out for example why that A#-B trill is unplayable on a standard tenor trombone, and why your harp part would be better notated in Gb than F#.

[Saul]

I'm performing my Prelude In B flat major 'Largo', composed in 2007. Probably my shortest piece ever, 18 measures , a single page.
The piece has some tricky chords on measures 12 and 13. You really have to stretch those hands to get the rite notes and to play them clean.

Hope you guys enjoy it.

I provided the score for download for any pianist who would be interested to play it and upload it here, I would love to hear a different reading.

Regards,

Saul

http://www.youtube.com/v/RCzu1fjoWss