Soaring on the Rays of Infinity - Piano Sketch

Hi Alex! I really enjoyed your piece, lots of great stuff! I'm not sure how much of this performance is going to reflect the actual orchestration but I would make use of a much more dramatic dynamic contrast between the sections.

 

Hey Alexander, thanks for sharing your piano sketch. I really appreciated listening to this to hear how your process works. I gather you create this to shape and mold your piece? However, what about the orchestration? Why don't you create a score from the piano before taking it to the DAW? I used to do what you're doing but I always felt I was missing the control that I hear in the orchestral pieces that I love which are all scored. Can you really achieve your goal without scoring? No doubt about it, your results are impressive, but do they have the orchestral detail that you desire? I could not keep it all in my head which is why I need to work on scoring things out. And more importantly, to learn from the orchestral masters. I'm also curious to hear what Doug's take is on this topic as well (shout out to Doug if you're out there).

 

That's nice, thanks for the compliment Gregory. I will, as soon as I finish my own deadline, I look forward to carving out some time and giving it the listen it deserves

Cheers

 

No doubt you're method is working well composing into Cubase. Honestly, its sounding pretty damn good! I just wonder (and don't know the answer) if you're missing out on some important details in the orchestration process by doing so. However, if nobody knows the difference, then who cares? Well, maybe its more up to you to decide if you're learning everything you want this way. I did it your way for many years and it was very successful but I felt something was missing and it wasn't satisfying for me. So now, I'm going back and taking a deep dive into scores, something which I wish I did much earlier in life. Just sayin (sharing old man's experience).

 

Irrelevent but i have to share...
Just to throw some better perspective on all of these various composing methods, I just got Prokofiev's Diaries 1907-1914 800pgs. Its the first of 3 parts so I guess 2400 pgs all together (he was a prolific diary writer too). He talks about life before MIDI and the Internet as he's learning to compose. I just started but its really fun reading about that time period as he was developing as a composer. Such a dramatic contrast to life today. In some ways so much more human and romantic. Well, I stupidly paid $20 for a beaten up old copy when Amazon has new ones for only $13. Better than all the libs and plugins I've bought this past year, it should be great fun. Highly recommended if you want some different perpectives.

And now back to your regular programming. And where will all of our diaries be 100 years from now? Lost in the digital ether? Although Prokofiev's, written on paper, will live on forever.

 

Wow !! I had no idea. How cool ! I need to pick these up. Thanks !

 

Bravo !!
Props to Dillon DeRosa !

As I mentioned previously, I WILL get to giving you very detailed comments soon.

I just listened to the fully completed orchestral version, and have a comment (take it or leave it) on the form.
Plopping the track into Garageband I can demonstrate very quickly.

The last drop down in intensity with the strings felt off to me. Sort of like those people that answer their phone no matter what they are doing.
You could be getting ready to have sex and if the phone rings they will say hold on and answer it.
Not that I know anyone who would do that....... (looking at wife...... that's right honey you play with my emotions and now the whole world knows about it - cue Sam Kinison style voice for all of this)

So this is flawed as all I am doing is snipping one part of your piece, and moving to another.
So ignore the bumps, as I don't even think Garageband has crossfades, but you'll get the gist.

Basically I would be more inclined to just keep the intensity up, and go straight to the finish line. You have done the "High/low" contrast enough that it loses it's power.

As mentioned above, I cut and pasted the audio from your track. I think I start around the 3:30 mark. All the material is in there, just moved one section with another

Anyhow........ of course this is subjective.

More coming later, but it sounds fantastic, and very inspiring

Doug

 

Can definitely hear how much work is in there, Alexander. Your effort and your results are inspiring to me.

 

Really terrific work Alexander! I can only imagine how much work it was to achieve that. So please bear with me, I'm just wondering out loud because this all interests and inspires me as well.

You've done a magnificent job mocking this sketch up on the piano. Impressive. And you've translated it very well to orchestration that is very colorful with lovely contrast. However, here's what comes to mind when I listen and compare with Korngold (yes, yes, I know this is dreadfully unfair. Curse and swear at me,....keep going.... and then lets move on and figure this stuff out OK?)

I hear your ideas both on the piano and in the orchestration as "blocks of ideas". This is actually how Korngold wrote too partially (maybe to match changing visual scenes?). The difference is....let me try this example and see if it translates....put your two fists together like they're punching each other. This is how I hear your music. Each idea seems disjunct from the next. And while Korngold does this too as I said, he is also intertwining some of the music ideas between each other. (as if you're fingers were stretched out on each hand and when you bring your hands towards each other, the fingers overlap). I think some of this might be in the inner orchestration that might be missing from your score. While you've got a fantastic piano sketch, as you translate to orchestra, it sounds as if you're playing some ensemble patches, and it all sounds pretty good and full, but I'm not hearing some of the inner voices that you might have put in had you written out the orchestration. For example, maybe some horn rhythms in the middle under the melody. Or some woodwind background ostinato that's barely heard but providing a texture bed. Or some additional counterpoint melodies. Or the string trills (at 39s in the Korngold ex.), or the woodwind trills used solely for texture. It would be neat to add some of these devices to your orchestration.

How to implement these orchestration ideas? I don't know. That's beyond me. These are just some ideas that came to mind as I listened. You're far ahead of anything that I could do so I really shouldn't be commenting at all though maybe some of these ideas might be of help....take them or toss them.

For comparison, listen to the inner lines and texture bed during the first 50 sec or so. Again, apologies for the comparison but come to think about it.... maybe should thank me for comparing you with Korngold.

 

Alexander, I thought you were intentionally making your recording sound lo-fi to create a nostalgic effect. You know the original Warner recordings of Sea Hawk are absolutely dreadful, something very bad happened (old is not always "gold"). As for your new recording, its significantly brighter and has more "presenece" in the melodic lines but might be too bright in some spots (careful with brass). I assume you added EQ and not just volume because it has a slightly harsher effect with this new brightness (its not just clarity). You're piece has a lot of sudden dynamics which would likely be smoothed out with real instruments both by acoustics, the players, and possibly recording methods (compression or tape saturation) so this is something to consider when using samples.

I have a fair amount of knowledge about mixing accumulated over the years, yet I personally care less about mixing as its just technical and often easily solvable problems. Whereas with composition and orchestration, these are more intrinsic to the music. In anycase, your mix sounds quite good overall. If you wanted to improve it further, there are various things you could try. Most importantly is to monitor each stem for clarity and dynamics and reverb. And compare combinations of stems together for balance and dynamics. And be careful not to over EQ (and beware of really harsh Q settings - trend toward very broad Q curves). You might want to use a bit of compression with your samples to smooth things out either on individual tracks or stems depending upon the situation.

Another idea you could possibly do (depending upon how your mix is set up and which is very time-consuming) is to mix in smaller sections to focus on the clarity of each particular section. IOW, your settings might be completely different for a soft section compared with a tutti section. Once you mix each of these sections, you could then compile them as interleaved A/B stems for the complete mix. This is a very complex method but one which would let you really zoom into the detail of each section. Again, as I said, its time-consuming so the payback is a small improvement which you might want only if you were creating a CD or something like that.

Really, we could write a book, but I'm not sure how much all this helps. Overall, its probably better you spend time on your composition and orchestration as thats where you'll get the greatest payback. And doing it over and over.

 

Alright..... I better just get started. It's one of those thing were you have so much to say, and then facing the reality of completing that task overwhelms,
and the risk is to never begin.

Let me just offer here little tick-tak things on this last version, and I'll circle back later about compositional craft

Around 1:41 or 1:42 it seems to me a little more rubato could be really effective.

The spot I am referring to
Your melody: A, B, B (with dotted rhythms) over the D-Eb-E. Then B,C,D over F

In my head I am hearing the tempo pick up speed a little more. Poco a poco. It repeats 3 times (the A-B-B) so say the 2nd time a little quicker and so
forth. You'll have to find the top range not to go above, before it sounds like a cartoon.

Then pull back the speed, where you have it now feels right, when the strings take over at 1:48 ish. At the 3rd measure of that 4 bar phrase again: poco a poco accel.

Where the timp roll comes in - two bars before the big crash -- put on the brakes. See how much (again this is going to be a point somewhere that is crossed won't be effective but silly) you can draw it out. This is a classic trick to bring out as much tension and release as possible. I think you still have room on your rope here.

An example is most likely worth 10,000 words. Just notice how the build to 1:49 happens. Faster, then before the climax point -----slow it down.....draw it out.

I know you are still working on the glue to adjust the spots that have been swapped around (how do you feel about the change ? Like it/hate it ?)

Just want to be clear that I was just cutting spots in garageband and moving the fews blocks.

I think you need to add in a measure or two to make the ear a little more prepared and ready. It's not "NEW" music that is needed, it's about the pacing.

Starting at around 5 minutes where the violin comes in and it's G with the melody going A to B. From that spot to the theme in A major needs another measure IMO.

I would not be concerned, in fact it would be welcome to my ears, about having a uneven number of bars for the phrase. It's pretty straight forward: either extend out the F7 or the all too brief E7. Either will work. So you could have E7 (or other extension) for a measure, and then the D-C# will come in and back to normal.

Or if you like the E7 being brief passing chord the F can be extended by means of rehamonizations (Extensions, or Tritone sub would work well here)


I just fumbled thru some examples to show. (played slow and sloppy, but it will give you a clearer idea) I am sure there are plenty more.
The good thing is it is clearly defined where we are going, and we can land easily on target;

Ex. 1 : Longer duration on E7
Ex 2: adding extensions to F7
Ex 3: using a tritone sub for F - (B)

(The other two are just stream of consciousness noddles.)






Just add a little space, and I am sure you will find a solution you like and IMO the pacing will be helped.



Same with the other "band-aid" spot.......it needs a little room to create a bridge


Those are the main things. I comment more soon, but it won't be too much on what needs fixing, more like "hey .....in the future XYZ could be done on different piece"

(Adding tools to the tool-box so to speak)

 

It sounds like Doug is talking about interpretation timing as discussed by Leon Fleischer and Yo-Yo Ma.