I don't understand what you mean about Christopher Redgate answering my question. I made a suggestion to the administrator of this forum for there to be a 'members own composition thread'. I would like to know how people feel about music. I would like everyone to explain their own music. It is interesting to me and I hope to others. I am sure that you are a member of more than one forum. What does it matter? Surely, everyone would like show their work to the biggest number of people possible so that I can gather information about my music and hopefully kind comments. I don't think that this is strange. I am also a member of Facebook.
If you read the questions and the comments on those websites, you will see there is a different focus. For example, the talk classical forum dissected the notation. They talked about over using accidentals. Whereas the French forum, concentrated on the emotional impact of the music. They called it humorous which I could understand at first. This is feedback from a small number of people. Obviously, the larger the group of people the better the feedback. If I was plastering my music on every website possible day after day, I could understand your apparent indignation. Forums are helpful to composers like me. It is a real opportunity to directly speak to real people. I am obviously keen to help people get involved in my music. Sometimes, I may be too keen and I apologise for that.
The extract is so short because I want to protect my rights as a composer. It also marks a natural break in the music- the piano starts immediately afterwards. Thirty seconds is very short and I will allow a longer viewing at a later stage when I get feedback I require. I have answered all of your questions can you answer mine, please. What do you think of my piece? I have received feedback about notational issues, title, emotions...the choice is yours.
Gosh, Ian, calm down! I am not indignant.
It's not really apt to comment on the music of such a short extract other than to note that it's an arresting and effective opening. However there are a number of technical matters, concerning both the notation itself and how the dots are to be performed.
For example, the recording that you posted seems to indicate that the dynamics you have written could be questioned by those whose comments you seek. Either because they may be impracticable, or as Black suggests, overwritten. Chris deviates considerably from them in any case. How do you feel about that? (He also plays a wrong note on line 3).
The oboe is less suitable for fluttertonguing than most other wind instruments - although there are some players who've managed to get round the problem - they tend to be people like Chris, but even he would find a fluttertongue at a quiet dynamic (p) a problem. Or would he? You would have to ask someone as good a player as he, hence my comment. Judging by his performance, I could confidently guess the answer to that and other questions.
Black has made some relevant points: I, and no doubt others, await your answers with interest. All those accidentals? Unnecessary surely? Some would argue that using the kind of notation that you do denies the player any freedom whatsoever - "anti-human" even (!): they would no doubt argue that it would be possible to use a simpler, freer-looking notation and still get an equally intense effect. What do you reckon?
