Looking for feedback

[Elow]

https://musescore.com/user/19075006/scores/5953162 Its not done. I started about a year and a half ago and then never finished it, and now i want to finish it. Just looking for anything that sounds off, so i can change it now instead of when i think i finish.

[Elow]

I see 82 is weird

[harrisonreed]

I've got some basic ones. Big pet peeves of mine when I get an arrangement from a composer or arranger who is so specific about the exact moment they want a note to end:

Screenshot_20201129-114010.png

Screenshot_20201129-113848_2_2.png

My pet peeve is that composers have been writing those exact rhythms for hundreds of years in a much simpler way by either tying into the next beat with a less complicated note length, or assuming that the performer knows enough to hold a note into the next down beat, or telling the performer what to do with an appropriate tenuto or staccato marking. Are the tied notes into the same pitch supposed to be rearticulated? The is no way to know, since it looks like you are just trying to show the exact point you want the pitch to end.

Always show the measure's subdivision in a way that is simple for the performer, and not in the way that makes the computer play it correctly. Good performers can interpret simpler notations to sound exactly like what you're trying to represent, and you want to write for good performers.

EDIT** My bad, I saw that one measure I thought should be a whole note actually changes pitches. Bad eyes lol

[LeTromboniste]

I agree with Harrison regarding the notation. All those ties to dotted or double dotted notes really make the parsing harder for what are actually very simple rhythm.

Composing-wise, I would encourage you to revise your definition of ranges. Based on this and the Christmas arrangement, I see you have a tendency to write for extreme ranges (both extremely low for the lowest instruments and extremely high for the 1st players). Yeah, pedals and high notes are cool. Hitting extreme notes occasionally where the context invites it is fine. But less is more. Doing it all the time strips it of its dramatic effect completely, especially when it's parts that aren't particularly meaningful. That also won't make you friends with the players, and the last thing you want as a composer is having a reputation for writing unidiomatic parts that are hard but unrewarding. For example, trumpet players won't be happy about an ostinato on high Bs and C's, or the first horn hanging out in super soft syncopations on Fs (and dissonant too) for so long. Makes their part very taxing for no particular reason. And sometimes your extreme ranges are just not realistic at all. A soft, slurred exposed high D in unison between 1st trombone, euphonium and horn is extremely risky, for example. Also, jazz screamers can play more or less routinely in the range you wrote for 1st trumpet, but what is considered high for orchestral players is different, because the technique and way they use their air is different. Some of the notes you call for are very rare in the classical repertoire, and overall this 1st trumpet part sits higher in general than most parts in the repertoire. Unless you're writing for a specific group with specific players in mind that happen to be some of the best professional players, it'd be better to stay somewhat conservative in this respect.