Describe your style in three words or fewer.
Suburban neoclassicism. :-)
Whatever does that mean?
The neoclassic part is fairly simple: I like simple architectural forms (sonata, rondo, etc.) and tertian harmonies. But suburban? My music is woven out of all of my musical experiences: Gregorian chant, Renaissance polyphony, Beethoven, Mahler, the rock I wallflowered at high school dances, Polish polkas, Irish dance music, and the flotsam and jetsam of popular culture. How I mix and balance these, and the aesthetic aim of the mix, constitute my style.
So tell me more. What about texture?
I am fond of contrapuntal textures, particularly tight imitation. Of late, my rhythmic language has been becoming richer, more complex. In some works (Trio for cl.,vla.pno), lines and their interactions are governed by a small group of intervals. In others (Minisym), the texture is a combination of descant pairs (like Josquin, only chromatic). In all cases, the unit of musical thought is not the sound-mass, the gesture, or the chord, but the melodic line.
Harmony?
Generally, I prefer tertian sonorities through the 11th, added-note chords, the occasional quartal chord. My recent pieces have tended toward diatonicism. Frequently I use consonant chords in rapid succession, establishing chromatic saturation. My general requirement is that harmony should inflect strongly.
Form?
A piece is a pathworking, leading from one mental or spiritual state to a different one. This sense of progression requires that the audience have road markers, that material presented in one light be presented in a different light. Often, traditional formal outlines help in making the process of the piece clear, but they are not the only way I accomplish this.
back home