Category: Composition

Whew! At long last I have finally finished recording the second set of Miniatures. Actually, I made the recording several weeks ago, but I finally got around to editing it with noise filters and eq and the like. I’m in the midst of the last week of the semester and am gearing up for finals, which amazingly is giving me a little time to get this done.

Way back when I started this second volume of Miniatures, I mentioned how these works reflect my improvisational style and humor. Now that I am through the next eight, I can confidently say that this next set fits very well. Some have funny names, some are exploratory with repeat signs, some are simple and accessible. Miniature XV, another carillon, is a lively postlude or concert piece. Since that is how I ended the last set of Miniatures, I did not want to end the second volume the same way.

I broke my own rules! This is two pages! It has a line for the pedals! It’s somewhat challenging! There are no repeat signs! (That last one is meant as a joke!) Let me explain: my wonderful mentor in composition, Denis Bédard, has a particular style that has had a great influence on me. In trying to come up with something that would fit well with these Miniatures and I remembered something about his works that he often does: label one part non-legato while the melody is labeled legato. It is not unusual in organ music, but it is his particular way of labeling it that I thought about.

And that was it! That little thought led to this final Miniature XVI. It took a few edits and revisions like Miniature XV did, but I am quite happy with the end result. There are no registration changes in the way I performed the work, though I think there certainly could be, especially at the reprise. But I wanted to demonstrate how these Miniatures can be adapted and interpreted. I am not a composer, at least with these works, where I feel that my voice needs to be heard as much as the performer’s interpretation. Download the work here!

It feels like an eternity since I’ve posted and it has been quite a while. It’s not surprising because I started a new job this fall teaching full-time. But it is also because I was unsatisfied with the final two Miniatures. As these particular compositions are somewhat fluid from movement to movement, I wanted the last two to be solid postludes. This Miniature XV, is another carillon piece similar to Miniature VIII. Honestly, I did not set out to write another carillon, it just turned into one as the piece developed.

Here is where the trouble began. One of the criteria I have had with these miniatures is to keep the number of pages to a minimum, but that has gotten in the way particularly in this piece. I tried to keep Miniature XV to one page but that final coda section really needed to be longer. And not just longer, it needs a canon! Oh, now it needs that flat VI chord! And it needs to modulate to minor! And! And! Unlike many of the other Miniatures, this went through quite a few edits before I was satisfied and I am satisfied. Download Miniature XV here at IMSLP!

Miniature XIV is pretty emblematic of the miniatures as a series of works. It is on one page, it contains a simple accompanying motif and melody, repeat sign is there, and it has the kinds of progressions I like to wander through when writing tonal music. What then separates this Miniature from the rest of the series? For me, it is that back and forth between that Eb and E in the opening motif. It’s minor! Now it’s major for a moment! Back to minor! That kind of modal mixing very easily leads to some nice dissonances. It is ultimately tonal, meaning that C is the center of all the tonal wandering, but it is finding a different way to move away from that center and find a satisfying way back. The ritard at the end is really necessary to emphasize both the melodic direction and the final chords after E natural and B natural resolve to E flat and C.

This may sound a little strange, but I don’t usually keep track of the key signatures of these Miniatures. They are usually composed individually and maybe other than general aesthetic, I don’t compare them back to back. Except when I notice it! After I finished writing this particular Miniature, I discovered that two movements are in C, three in E, and one in A. I can say for sure that the next two Miniatures will not be in any of those key centers.

PS: the title can be roughly translated as “gone into the darkness.” I don’t think of darkness as implicitly bad, but in the context of looking into the night sky in complete darkness. Having grown up in Alaska, I really miss those skies filled with stars. That is what I was truly thinking of when composing this Miniature.

Download the score for Miniature XIV on IMSLP here!

After several Miniatures that have been exploring repeat signs here, here, and here in this most recent set, I decided I needed a compositional palette cleanser. That cleanser took the form of a fugue, which is not always unusual for me. Improvisationally, fugues are generally something I go to as they are always challenging. Even in composition, it is tough to write a fugue that is truly successful and interesting. For Sonata No. 2, I wrote an easy four part fugue which presented all sorts of compositional challenges. Well, I decided to happily take up the challenge again.

This time, for Miniature XIII, I gave myself a few different parameters: 5/4 time signature, a “chorale fugue” with the subject used as the chorale in the pedals (not a REAL chorale), and keeping it generally easy. I think the funkiest thing about the fugue is that it is in 5/4. That time signature though allowed me to play with the accents between pairs of bars giving the impression of groups of 6 or 4 but never letter that take over the general accent that happens on a down beat. Download the score free on IMSLP!

My Miniature XII, latest in the series, is here and I hate to say it, it’s left overs. By that I mean, the kernel of the movement comes from Miniature X. In that blog post I mentioned my fascination with using repeats to create a lot of music with little in the score. That particular movement took a long time to write and generated a lot of material, some of it being worthy of its own movement.

Now when I talk about material, in this case it was more of a tonal progression than say a literal set of specific notes. Listening to Miniature X, there are a lot of places that I tried to take it, none of them correct until I found its C major/C minor interaction at the beginning. This Miniature XII uses one of those rejected progressions and maintains the use of repeats. Here is where I want to address something: I am not the biggest fan of 4×4 phrasing. Mozart and Haydn and much of pop music did/does it excellently and I have no problem with that for them. It’s fine, I am just not terribly interested in it and prefer to subvert it when necessary. (Honestly, it always depends on the composition.)

In order to avoid the constant 2×2 repeated measure groupings, I stuck a single measure in the middle of them once in a while. I am not claiming to be clever or anything like that, just that the solution to all the repeats giving the work a 4×4/2×2 like phrase structure is a single measure. 8 measures becomes 9, or 12 becomes 13. It gives the work an odd feel at moments when you might expect the harmony to follow the strict phrase structure. It keeps the work fresh and interesting! At least I hope so. You judge: get the score here on IMSLP.

Every once in a while I write something that needs no revisions. Or nearly very little editing upon its conception. This Sarabande de lo dulce or Miniature XI, is one of those works. I love it when an idea just flows out nearly in completion after conception. There were a few minor edits, but what you here in the recording is nearly what I began with.

Perhaps part of that is being an improviser/composer. There is a huge difference between the two: improvisation is truly in the moment, whereas composition has the time and patience to realize a fruition in its ideas. That’s a bit simplistic, but I don’t think it’s entirely inaccurate. I have experienced that ebb and flow of ideas when everything clicks or the opposite, when nothing works and it is kind of frustrating. This can happen both in the unfolding of an improvisation or as a composition is being developed.

As I said in the beginning, this piece just flowed easily. I would contrast that with Miniature X which went through a number of edits. In fact, I finished this work before Miniature X. I gave myself a limitation of being in the lowest parts of the organ, which requires an instrument that can speak in those octaves. If I were on the Moller at the Monastery, it would never work. But being at Holy Spirit in Missoula, on the wonderful Bond organ, I knew it would work really well. Download the piece here on IMSLP!

Today I present Miniature X! I was given the opportunity to record this on the Bond organ at Holy Spirit Episcopal, a German neo-Baroque instrument that is absolutely spectactular. I have recorded on this instrument before here and a few things I wasn’t as satisfied with, but those were just a couple of wild improvisations. Just about every summer, I end up back in Montana and I end up in Holy Spirit. This year I took advantage of the great space to record two of the newest Miniatures.

Miniature X is actually a reject from another work that will be out sometime in the next year. I liked it on its own merits, but not in the context of the other work. In fact, this C major work has gone through quite a few edits to get were it is today. When I compose for the organ or piano, there is much more back and forth between conception and performance than any other composing I do. That is entirely due to the fact that I love performing keyboard works as much as I enjoy composing for those instruments.

This Miniature X is clearly a post-minimalist inspired work – lost of repeats to make efficient use of the score limitations. When I wrote the Moto Minuetto Minimalismo, I didn’t expect to come back to that style. But I think that’s why this particular piece works as a movement in the Miniatures: it is does not specifically fit into things I generally write for organ, but is worthy of being out in the world as a piece of music. A couple of things that changed when I practiced/performed it: the final section went faster, very little dynamic change, and the nature of most of the repeats. Enjoy and download the piece for FREE ON IMSLP.

It has been a fruitful day today! I made some time to sit at Duquesne’s Chapel organ and make a recording of a new work. And not just any work, but a series I look to continue for the rest of my compositional life: Miniatures. I believe it is important for organists to have access to newer music that is meant for both performance and liturgy. Granted, I don’t think that individual movements of the first set of Miniatures is going to light up organist’s recital lists, but having access to pieces that are not hymn tune based are really important.

The first Volume (something I just decided to name them) has some of my favorite little works I have written. There’s a post-minimalist piece, a jokey Italian title, and a tribute to one of the great organist composers. I’ve used this moniker as an avenue to produce technically accessible pieces that are also not specifically liturgical. Of all the works I produce, I feel like these works reflect my improvisational style and my sense of humor.

And the beginning of the next volume of Miniatures starts with a piece titled Andante Religioso. The “religious” side of it was the idea of antiphony – each line has a sort of response. It’s a simple idea, but short pieces like these work well with simple ideas. Download the score on IMSLP here!

I’m catching up to our current week of Lent! As these Lenten Improvisations were being composed, I remember thinking that the compositions as a whole needed to have an arc. For these first three, I wanted them to slowly get closer to something resembling tonality; meaning I wanted the pieces to be less and less abstract as they came, ultimately leading to the final movement for Palm Sunday.

My relationship with this movement has always been interesting. Every time I come back to it after not playing it for sometime I always question the piece. Composers often write works that they are not totally satisfied with and yet still release them. The compositional device used is pretty obvious: canon. It is a device I find consistently useful and always interesting.

I think what happens is that the piece begins and I groan at the obvious compositional technique used until the pedals come in and remember how good the two canons/imitations sound against each other. And by the end of the work, with all the imitations/counterpoints moving, it’s a really cool effect. Like the last two movements, this one also ends with the sound/silence effect, but I feel it is less important to the overall purpose and goal of the piece. Still useful, but this is again pointing to where the Lenten Improvisations are going as a whole.