Piano Concerto in G minor

Wow, this is the most detailed comment i have received.

Regarding to your comment, yes I do agree this piece lacks of something that binds it together as a whole. I listening to ur comments and stuff already gave me an idea of how to change it, in addition to the ideas i hav already had.

I agree with you too about repetitive. This piece also has too many ideas. I am currently slowly editing this piece, hopefully it should be better.

Thanks to others too for your contributions, it is a real pleasure to get feedbacks frm you guys =D

Oh well, inspiration drives only about 30% of the total music i think, the other 70% depends on how hard the composer is willing to work... I need that 70%!

Steven

Can you make an mp3 out of this? This piece seems very interesting!

I am thinking of doing so, even though I am not that good at it, but only after I am happy with the final edition. lol

I am still editing it right now.

Acatually i'd say inspiration is like the talent...just 1% out of the end result...

yeah i agree wth u... sigh i havent been doing anything

I admit I did not listen to the entire piece, but what struck me even listening to small part of it was the abundance of themes. I personally think (as a classical musician/composer with a strong liking to musical form) it would be better if you stuck with two or three themes and developed them. This would, in my opinion, give coherency to the piece. And oh, parts of this piece sound astoundingly like Tchaiovsky's piano concerto in B minor.

Other than what everyone else has said about the impossibility of the piano part, I love this piece. I'm probably a bit prejudiced because I listen to Rachmaninoff and Tchaikovsky so much. The orchestral texture is dense throughout, perhaps too dense for some (although personally I have no problem with that). Also, the piano passages seem so powerful that they lack a certain intimacy. I would maybe suggest mixing in the powerful sections with a greater quantity and variety of calm, intimate sections.

Having listened to this piece again, I enjoyed it far more the second time. Like they say, Music is 95% inspiration, 4% perspiration, and 7% basic maths skills.

Ok, well, I have to say...this really is an extremely pleasing piece to listen to. Even if your individual voice isn't coming out as much as you like to, I can see some individuality. For instance, the first entrance of the solo. That is truely wonderful and catchy. Almost an eastern feel to it. But you are definately headed in the right direction.

Hi Steven,

I think Matusleo's assessment and suggestions are terrific. It sounds like you've got a post-Thalbergian Reinecke-Litolff-Henselt thing going here. What separates that group from the "immortals" are the elements of melodic and harmonic originality. Those composers (especially Thalberg and more especially Henri Herz, who both represent an earlier style than your piece) could never break the bonds of close harmonic relationships, and could rarely produce an unexpected cadence. But they were all masters of passage-work and effect. But this is not enough. I too enjoyed almost every measure of your concerto movement, but not the work as a whole. Structure is the last frontier.

Vary your orchestra textures, give the piano more rest. The theme on page 25, after the 2/4 measure, is inadequately stated with only 2 voices, the right hand melody and broken chord accompaniment. At least fill in the right hand with octaves and 3-5 note chords. The theme itself, as much else, gets mired in repetitive rhythms, and the harmonies are too predictable. You must break the anchor-line and move more freely through tonalities. Study the likes of Chopin, and even the Tschaikovsky first concerto for this, as in the long running up-and-down 16th note passage in 2-hand single-notes towards the end of the last movement (with orchestra accompaniment stating the second theme motive), leading to the last long orchestra tutti before the final slow statement of the (second) theme. Study that passage well and you will quickly see what there is to learn from it. And listen for true development in other works, as opposed to sequence.

The thing is, you have a real talent for expression through passagework, and a solid sense of the romantic idiom, strongly derivative though it is. There is nothing wrong with writing in this style, but study the greats closely... the Rachmaninoff concerti, Chopin concerti (though not many orchestration lessons there!) and ballades, Tchaikovsky... and see what makes them successful and original. Some things can't be taught, such as melodic genius. But you have so much ability that I feel you can improve if you study what makes melody and harmony great in the music of others. Keep at it... never stop perfecting yourself, and listen very carefully... outside your chosen realm!! Apply what you hear in non-romantic concerto pieces to your own work. Bach has much to teach you (us) about harmony.

Actually, your concerto reminds me most of the Alkan concerto for solo piano, from his collection of etudes op. 39. Listen to it! He is a very fine composer.

Best of luck, and Happy New Year!