ClassicalSax

Can't think of one?! How about most of the symphonies by Simpson and Pettersson, Rouse's 1st (haven't heard the second), Penderecki's 8th and countless others. In the 20th and 21st centuries form has become far less strict and so we don't really need to use sonata form at the start of every symphony. I know that when I write I don't tend to adhere to a strict form - that's not to say I just write impulsively, I just continually expand on and develop an idea. And there's nothing structurally wrong with that.

On to the actual piece, there were some very good ideas in there - I loved the chords and some of the melodies had great potential (especially the double reed trio starting at bar 16). However, I think the piece was lacking some depth, and there were a couple of seemingly random ideas that didn't really go anywhere. Example, bars 5-7, not a bad idea, and it could work well if used correctly, but I didn't hear any restatements or any developments of this motive. It kind of just briefly appeared and then went away. The same goes for a few ideas later on as well (the woodwind idea at bar 35 could have been expanded upon a bit more).

I also felt it could have used more counterpoint, and less long chords with no movement. A good example is bars 10-11. My ears wanted a timpani/low brass funeral march rhythm on beats 2 and 3 of each bar but that's just me. However, I think that those bars, and some later on do lack some depth. Just my opinion though - you may wish to keep these sections simple, and save counterpoint for later.

And just a small orchestrational thing, why the cellos and double basses in unison? Most of the time you either a) give the double basses a separate part, b) if you want to strengthen the cello line, double the cellos in octaves with the double basses or c) omit one or the other.

Anyways, that's my incredibly long list of suggestions. There was plenty to like about this - it's not a bad start. It just needs a bit more work.

- ClassicalSax

P.S. Liked the DSCH at bar 14!