Time Machine

• Jun 19, 2010 - 16:13

This is my second major composition with Musescore, and it hopefully will be published someday. It's basically done, aside from the percussion. If any of you have any opinions about it they are more than welcome, as I'm not the most experienced composer and want to make as many improvements as I can. Thank you!!

Attachment Size
Time Machine.mscz 32.46 KB


i really like this piece. It actually reminds me of a time machine. And the harmonies in the beginning and middle are cool. The only one thing i didn't like was the ending note. I think both measures should be fermatas and more instruments should join in on the last measure. But thats my opinion. Nice work.

In reply to by Atomicbob11

Yea i thought about the ending for a while. i started to do one thing, and I accidentally hit the G and decided if i had that G# just hanging there and ended it quietly it would be nice. And yeah, both notes are really supposed to be held for a long time, and musescore's playback doesn't include fermatas so i just made it like four measures long. My thinking on the last note was that i wanted it to be quiet and simple so just having the 1-5-8 on the upper woodwinds seemed to accomplish that nicely. I'll mess around with it though and see how it sounds. Thanks for your comment!

I liked it too. The sound is actually very cool, fresh, quite catchy in places, and atmospheric and strange (in a good way) in other parts, and I like how it drives along. Too bad I'm not hearing the glissandos (I think that's a known issue). Interesting how the 16th notes in the clarinet get a pulsing, electronic sound like a machine rotating. The melody starting at meas. 67 has a chorale quality, almost made me think of Christmas carols for some reason -- maybe just a bit incongruous with the first part -- but certainly pleasant and melodic. Overall, very interesting, well-scored. Thanks for posting it.

In reply to by coralkeys_

Yeah, I'm well aware of the issue with the glissandos. It's a shame because in my opinion that's one of the coolest sounds french horns can make. I realize that the chorale section contrasts the first part, but the intention there was to create the effect of a time machine. I don't know if you noticed, but both the first part and the chorale begin with a single hovering note in the upper woodwinds, but then continue differently. What this is supposed to do is mimic how time can unravel in completely different ways. Just kind of an imagined effect there I guess. Anyways, thanks for your comments!

I liked it , good movement throughout. Quite often you have the tuba and euph doubling each other. While the euph can play that low, it's not always fun doing it for long periods of time. Double at the octave maybe one dynamic less. And, please lose the bolero percussion, it's been done before and i think it distracts from this very nice work. Just saying...

In reply to by stewkingjr

what do you mean by 'bolero percussion'? and by the way, i might add that while I do play percussion, its quite complicated to come up with a more complete percussion score for the entire piece.

First off, it's a nice piece. there are some good moments in there to be sure. there are a few things i'd look at:

the rhythmic notation in the beginning for the timpani/bass drum is unclear. always try to show the beat. so, dotted eighth, sixteenth tied to sixteenth, followed by the three sixteenths would be a bit easier to read.

you might want to add some notation for the clarinets such as "breathe when needed" or "switch players as needed." that's a long time for everyone to be playing the same lick.

when the flutes come in m. 13, it's in a weaker part of their range against a louder part in the rest of the instruments. it definitely depends on numbers, but be aware. you also have them marked ppp vs. the mf in the clarinet. they won't be heard if you want that much of a difference. even more so when the trumpets enter in 17. they're in a loud range of their instrument. i think when you flip it in m. 29 with the flutes on top will be more successful.

you have another repeated section starting at 41 in the brass. that's always a chop buster, hitting the same note, repeated. and it's difficult. a college group might nail hitting the attack seamlessly each time, but it's a tough idea for that long to hold out. unless you need the strength in the doubling, maybe passing it between parts (trumpets a2 or horns a2 in octaves to give players a break.)

i like how the running 16ths move into the syncopated hits in 61 unison bleeding into the one oboe note sustained. that's very well done. the counterpoint in the following adagio is also nicely done to sustain interest.

at the very end, i like the holding of the sus 7 before resolving. it might be a bit long to hold it, but you'd have to hear it live to decide. leaving the ending as just an open 5th adds a bit of mystery, but it can lack closure for some. I think it's just fine. major/minor, doesn't matter much to me as i'll just take the 5th for what it's worth.

very nicely done.

very nice piece, though listening to it on my machine wasn't really comfortable... my sound card does apply the reverberation and the chorus, and unfortunately the default settings for all the tracks are at about 20% for each of them, which could be fine for a single or double track but not for an orchestra piece like this.

I've took the freedom to change the mixer settings - of course I touched /just/ the mixer, all the composition is exactly as it was (sorry for any mistake, if I happened to unwillingly modify the score, that was out of my purposes).

If your soundcard / MIDI playback respects balance, reverb and chorus, you will find this piece even more enjoyable in this stereo version - if not, then you wouldn't find any big difference with respect to the original.


Attachment Size
Time Machine (Stereo).mscz 32.58 KB

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.