Leaderboard

Now THIS will be a challenge.

I composed this piece in late 2010-early 2011. I composed it for a string orchestra, a string quartet, and a woodwind quartet (flute, oboe, clarinet, bassoon), and solo piano. This was my first attempt at a serious large scale work and it obviously has flaws in it. I couldn't find the original finale files, but I have the audio and a not so cleaned up score, but I'll update it when I find it. I also presented the work to my orchestra conductor at my college, and it was premiered by the chamber orchestra I was part of. I was NOT satisfied with the performance (due to many reasons), but I will include a youtube link to the performance of it (the 1st movement was not played in the live performance). Any comments/reviews/bashings appreciated :) The link to the live performance (the audio/video are not exactly synced for some reason):

Maybe it's just me, but I couldn't really discern a main theme. I think the problem maybe it's not...developed (maybe repeated?) enough...or is just too "unstable" to hold anyone's interest. But to answer your question above: yes. PS: I agree with Sojar about the Metamorphosen comparison.

Thanks for the feedback Jair! The 1st movement I think is definitely more sprawled out and not as focused as the others. The "official" reason I got from my conductor for not playing the 1st movement was that it was just not ready by the time of the performance (which I wholeheartedly agreed with). And yes, those chords in the 2nd movement WERE played dryed and not pedaled. There were more little changes like that...hence me not being super satisfied with the live performance.

There has been many good pieces based on a Shakespeare's topic. It will be a challenge! I'll consider an option to enter as a contestant. It will likely be a choral piece if I decide to compete.

Brilliant! I had no idea three piccolos could make such lovely sounds together. The musicians hips in this performance are incredible. And congrats to you for writing such a natural piece for such an unusual ensemble. I'm going through your works for the first time on here, and they are quickly becoming some of my favorites on the site.

This is very cool! I have to say so far I'm liking the 2nd movement a bit more than the first. This style of music is not quite what I am used to, so I'll try to provide as constructive feedback as possible, but I can tell you already that, and this is just my opinion, but those loud chords in the piano in the second movement, not too long after the beginning? I think they would sound better if they were pedaled. To me in the recording it sounds like they were played dry, but I don't know if that was intentional or not. That's really the only thing that's stuck out to me so far in the second movement. Ok it sounds like the third movement is starting now. Oh man... oh this is gorgeous! Dude I really really like this movement so far. That introduction was absolutely sublime, and the faster theme that follows it is quite nice and perky, and very catchy! Very nice! Oh and it's going back into those nice slow rich textures again... So far I'd have to say the third movement is the highlight of the piece. I would have maybe liked to hear those slow themes a little bit more, perhaps I enjoyed them a little too much! lol Ok fourth movement time... This is cool! I'm liking the folksy string elements so far. This is going all over the place, but not necesarilly in a bad way. It sounds very cool! Sorry that I can't be more specific than that but like I said this style is different than what I'm used to. Overall, one of my main feelings is that perhaps the first movement doesn't quite fit the piece like the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th do... and I'm not sure why. It could just be because it's the only one that wasn't in the live recording, but it was definitely the one I had the hardest time immersing myself into. By the second movement I was quite enjoying it, and by the third movement, I was hooked. That third movement is just absolutely great. Highlight of the piece for sure, and the fourth movement rounds it up with a nice finish. Very nice! Edit: Ok upon listening again I redact what I originally said about the first movement feeling out of place. I now think it's due to comparing it to the live recordings for the other three movements.

Ken has quite a point there. Granted, your musical setting is great (fitting for such a grandiloquent Psalm), but one feels something missing over there. I usually tend to think about music as storytelling, and will use an example to bring home my point: you kind of jumped straight into the story's "conflict" without setting up our musical "characters". Nothing wrong with the writing itself - it's rather an issue with the piece's structure. But I must add that I appreciate very much the work as it is, and feel absolutely related to what you're attempting to tell. Thanks for sharing!

The audio player has been acting a little weird for me, so I didn't get to hear all of it, but what I did hear was quite lovely! I say remove everything before measure 14. Too long, meandering, and pointless (though it COULD work as an 'attaca' from the 1st movement...but I don't think it will). I concur with what Ken said, you need a strong exposition and have a primary "theme" from which all of your stuff develops from. What you have does kinda sound like the "B" section of the traditional ABA slow movement format. Your string writing overall is very nice. I think you can divisi up some of your stuff within sections to make it sound more cleaner...especially some of those tricky triplet passages (around measure 49 in the 2nds). Your string bass writing looks a bit awkward and difficult, with giant leaps and higher than usual ranges (measure 48 looks treacherous)

Funny how a simple word in the title is a game-changer in terms of audience expectations.

Generally, I try to comment on anything that I make any meaningful observation on. And if ever someone comments on a work I've mine, I'm always sure to go through their stuff and find something to give my opinion on. Most of the people on here who frequently post and comment are much more established members of the community than I am, so I've always assumed that the longer I'm around and the more I grow as a composer, the more feedback I can expect from the more experienced.

If this is a real live performance then you are ahead of the game because it sounds great. But to me, musically, it sounds like a long development section that never had the benefit of an exposition to proceed it. instead of the lush opening, as you call it, which is not bad, but doesn't solve the problem of needing a strong-ish theme, a statement. Even being the second movement doesn't obviate that need. And I would start right out with it. No warm ups or anything. Check out the opening in Samuel Barber's Violin Concerto to see what I mean. After that opening he goes all over the place. But without that opening, everything that follows is meaningless.

That sounds like a good idea. I thought of suggesting it but I didn't want to be too pushy.

This! After listening to this piece WAY after I wrote it, I came to the same conclusion. And I also agree with everything else you said about the movements in a suite. Though I think it would be more "appropriate" to change the title from Chamber Suite to a Chamber Symphony. Thanks for the feedback!

Indeed, I tried to portrait sort of regular daily life of birds :)

You didn't specify what you think the obvious flaws are. They are not obvious to me in the nuts and bolts. I found it all very clever and very inventive. It held my attention throughout, with many very beautiful gestures. As an orchestral suite my only complaint is one of proportion. (back seat driving disclaimer) Each movement is far too long with too many ideas. Each movement in a suite should be mono-thematic. I think of Stravinsky's Pulcinella or even Ligeti where each movement is essentially an etude, or snapshot. The music is very fine, even brilliant, but there is no need to throw the kitchen sink into every movement.

This is just awesome! Good job man!

It seems that "Classical Revivalists" are indeed trapped between the more fashionable "Baroque Revivalists" and the "Romanticism did never die" movement (towards which I seem to gravitate). Nevertheless, it's a tough rabbit to pull out from a hat - to compose convincingly in an old-fashioned, authentic style (not the "Neo-classical" promoted by Stravinsky and Prokofiev, but rather in the way that Haydn or Bocherini would have done it), yet managing to sound fresh and original. That is a feat in itself, and you've been able to do it consistently. The fact that people you didn't even know chose the work for a performance speaks for itself. Good job!