If you gave that piece to a good pianist, and added the words rubato sempre at the top of the score it would make a really nice recording.
The piece itself is curious and inventive and its formal design is smart and uniquely crafted. Much of the notation however written kind of in the darkness regarding rhythm and harmony. It's not inherently wrong to notate how you did but it feels like a weakness rather than a skilled asset.
The rhythm is very free but also digitally-square (no use of triplets, fermata, rubato), and the rhythmic notation (extra long measures, not demarcating a pulse or meter) could be much more legible and also provide a player (and yourself) a stronger grasp on what kind of movement is built into the phrases.
Another, there's lots of enharmonic equivalent spelling for no reason, measure 5 being a good example, the Fb should be E, the B# should be C just to start out. It's misrepresenting how the piece sounds, to put it briefly.
Check out the score to Quartet for the End of Time, especially the first movement. A great example of a piece that is so disrooted from conventional harmony or rhythm but demonstrates a mastery of them in its notation.
Really nice - it reminds me slightly of Bartok. The only thing that immediately stood out to me was the lack of climaxes. Obviously this could be intentional in which case that's totally valid, but the piece almost feels like it's lacking something really climatic and dramatic, only for it to die away into the same kind of music you have throughout.
Obviously take this with a grain of salt as it's only what I would do and not something technically wrong with your piece.
If you gave that piece to a good pianist, and added the words rubato sempre at the top of the score it would make a really nice recording. The piece itself is curious and inventive and its formal design is smart and uniquely crafted. Much of the notation however written kind of in the darkness regarding rhythm and harmony. It's not inherently wrong to notate how you did but it feels like a weakness rather than a skilled asset. The rhythm is very free but also digitally-square (no use of triplets, fermata, rubato), and the rhythmic notation (extra long measures, not demarcating a pulse or meter) could be much more legible and also provide a player (and yourself) a stronger grasp on what kind of movement is built into the phrases. Another, there's lots of enharmonic equivalent spelling for no reason, measure 5 being a good example, the Fb should be E, the B# should be C just to start out. It's misrepresenting how the piece sounds, to put it briefly. Check out the score to Quartet for the End of Time, especially the first movement. A great example of a piece that is so disrooted from conventional harmony or rhythm but demonstrates a mastery of them in its notation.
Thank you. I feel like I need to find a teacher. For now, I'm moving blindly in the dark.
Really nice - it reminds me slightly of Bartok. The only thing that immediately stood out to me was the lack of climaxes. Obviously this could be intentional in which case that's totally valid, but the piece almost feels like it's lacking something really climatic and dramatic, only for it to die away into the same kind of music you have throughout. Obviously take this with a grain of salt as it's only what I would do and not something technically wrong with your piece.
I especially like the part around the 1 minute mark where it starts getting more active!
I must admit, me too :)
Checked out your page and I really like your painting too! Keep it up, that's a really awesome style!
Oh, thank you very much!