Leaderboard

Hi everyone, For those who don't know me my name is Camille, I'm French and I'm 17 years old. I'm familiar with classical music and orchestral litterature and I often compose for piano and orchestra. These last 3 months I composed a piano concerto in C minor. This is my big project of the moment and also the one that took me most time to compose. I create this topic to share the first movement of this piano concerto. It lasts about 17 minutes and follow a strict sonata form. I took the habit to compose a piano concerto per year and this is what I consider my most accomplished piece so far. Here is below the score and the audio. Enjoy the music, and, please, tell me your opinion about this composition. STRUCTURE OF THE MOVEMENT : INTRODUCTION : M. 1-31 (Moderato, TEMPO I) : Orchestral introduction, statement of the first “theme” on cellos and violas. Dramatic crescendo until the piano entrance M 31-39 : brief piano cadenza allowing the listener to be more familiar with the main theme/material of the piece. Little arpeggios … EXPOSITION: M. 40 – 76 (Allegro) : This is the one ! After a short motif used later in the concerto (in the cello/bass part) statement of the THEME 1 A (violins parts) that as been stated in the introduction. Repeated in piano part m.57. The reappearance of theme 1A leads to a dramatic climax m.70 (being the continuity of 1A). M. 77 – 120 (Vivace) : THEME 1 B. Much faster, this theme consists of a repeated eight-notes pattern in the woods. The piano responds with an avalanche of sixteenth notes. Until m.120, strings are an accompaniment. Main motives are stated in the woods (such as the motif m99, flutes and oboes, it will appear later in the development). The pianist is showing is virtuosity in his modulating part and is assisting the orchestra. M17-20 : end the of first theme with a frenetic climb. M 120-127 : Transition to THEME 2. The piano part is quoting 1A and the clarinets are stating a thematic material of transition later used in the development. The rhythm seems to slow down allowing a quasi-cadenza in piano part (m127) leading to… M 128-150 (Andante) : THEME 2A. Lyrical theme (piano part) that appears 3 times, each one being richer in accompaniment and chord. The 3rd one is introduced by the clarinet material OF m120-127. M 150-169 : THEME 2B : consisting (mainly) of one quarter note and six descending quavers. Again, a virtuosic piano and a support orchestra merges and form a whole for this 2B. M 170-184 : Return of THEME 2A but in a heroic climax where the piano supports the orchestra with arpeggiated chords. Transition with big orchestra chord until… M. 185-194 : ENDING OF EXPOSITION : Theme 2A and 2B are combined but in a the minor key of C to allow the arrival of … DEVELOPMENT: M. 195 – 215 : A repetition of the orchestral introduction with a few small things arranged to lead to the development M. 215 – 250 : Basically THEME 1A is all over the place, dissected, disguised, modulated. Have fun trying to count how many times it appears, you will be wide of the mark lol (You’ll notice, by the way, the transition theme M247, clarinets). M. 251 : 266 : Same thing as m215-250 but with THEME 1 B. M. 267-280 : mish-mash of T1A and T1B leading to CADENZA: M 280-323 : The cadenza is divided in two parts each one being a recapture of T1A. One is aggressive and fast while the other must be played maestoso. M 323-337 (En ralentissant tempo T2) : THEME 2 A being stated in the form of a bucolic love letter leading to M. 339 – 350 (Tempo I) : orchestral introduction allows the arrival of : RECAPITULATION: M. 350 – 383 : THEME 1A is repeated with a long piano speech of with what I called earlier the “continuity of” 1A. M.384 – 404 : THEME 1B (modulations, few changes + new clarinet melody) + transition theme leading to M 405 – 417 : Small piano cadenza, this one could be improvised by the pianist ! Statement of THEME 2 A with big and dramatic piano chords helping the orchestra to achieve the tragic of the moment. M 418 – 421 : THEME 2 B faster and faster. CODA : M. 422 - END (Vivace) : Using of T1A with virtuosic piano passages and symbiosis between soloist and orchestra until the end.

First of all, thank you @Ivan1791 @PaperComposer and @Eickso for taking the time to comment this piece. This is so meaningful and helpful for a composer to receive feedbacks and advice, I appreciate that. @Eickso : I'm very glad you managed to listen to the entire piece, I know it can be scary when such a large composition is in front of you. As far as the lenght of this movement is concerned, I think exactly like you for other compositions. I often compose piano piece that don't exceed 5 minutes because I feel I expressed what I had to say, and it's no need to compose more. But this is a piano concerto and not only I had there A LOT of ideas and themes to express and expose but also I had to respect the sonata form for such a composition. I think I'll write another comment to give the structure of the movement because I know that it can appear too long and with no logic ! In the past, I've already composed such movements that didn't exceed 9 minutes and it was right because it was in a classical style (such as Mozart's or Haydn's concertos). But there I feel I had to go further and I can assure you I wasn't in the "just keep going" mentality you mentionned before (although I know exactly what you mean and I respect your opinion about it because I know some young composers that composed ~30 minutes long movement !!). In other words, I know that it can seem long but actually, it's not that long for a romantic piano concerto ! Chopin, Brahms, Tchaikovsky and others did much longer. Furthermore, I already know that the 2 next movements won't be that long as they only be a slow movement and a rondo. When it comes to the Rachmaninoff's similarities, I can tell you I wasn't inspired at all by his 2nd concerto (neither in the form nor the themes...). In my opinion, as Rach is one of my fav, his music is so IN me that some similarities are reflected in my music. I take your remark well because it's always a compliment to hear that this concerto could be a Rach ! In fact this is the inconvenience of being a young composer, I might know the music rules and theorie but my style is still evolving and your mind see a Rachmaninoff where it's a Camille ahah ! By the way, I'll listen to the composition you mentioned, and it would be a pleasure to penpal you, I could give you my Instagram to talk ahah ! @PaperComposer : Thanks for your comment ! You did well to listen again without the score. It allows, I think, to be more focused on the melody and the logic behind the movement. I know it can be dreadful for some composers to put arpeggios because it's the easiest way for the piano to accompany the orchestra, but I always thought that arpeggios had their place in a concerto at certain times. I find it beautiful and helpful for the pianist because it's, in a way, relaxing and a break before going on a melody. At 7:02, these octaves-arpeggios are based on the motif of the first subject. At that very moment the music reaches a climax that allowed me to put octaves (you're right, it's time to the soloist to shine !! Octaves are a great way to highlight virtuosity in piano concerto, especially with a speed that high). The flute melody after the real cadenza is a reminiscence of the first subject of the B theme (the slow one). It permits a good transition to the closing episode of the development with a statement of the second theme (follow by the reexposition). If this reminds you Rachmaninoff, this wasn't on purpose. As I said before, I'll do a description of the design of the movement ! 🙂 Thanks again for listening, I'm glad you appreciated the music. @Ivan1791 I am, too, really happy that people are getting more and more attracted again by tonal music. I'm so pleased you think it's a good piano concerto. Thanks for your support!

Good evening everyone, I am excited to present a new piece I have been working on: "Sinfonietta No. 2 for Large Orchestra". I have been working on this piece since last December (with a few interruptions due to the pandemic and life in general) and just added the finishing touches this last week. I chose what you might call an "extended" sonata form, with a longer introduction, exposition of two themes, development, recapitulation, and resolution/coda. I am interested in any and all constructive feedback. Since I just completed this piece, I'm very interested and open to ideas on how it could be improved. Like my last work, it is a little long clocking in around 20 minutes, so I broke it up into "chunks" if you want to listen a little bit at a time: (0:00 - 4:12) Introduction (0:00 - 1:33) A piercing opening that leads into a stormy "Infernal" theme (1:33 - 3:48) An ominous theme that leads into a passionate proclamation (3:48 - 4:12) - Brief return of the opening theme (4:12 - 5:48) Exposition of Theme A, a thundering overflow of aggression (5:48 - 6:32) Brief Transition from Theme A to Theme B (6:32 - 8:19) Exposition of Theme B, a wandering chromatic theme underscored by a heavy ostinato (8:19 - 14:03) Development, referencing and expanding the themes above, while deriving a few new ideas from the themes as well (14:03 - 15:35) - Recap of Theme A, transposed (15:35 - 16:00) - Brief Transition form Theme A to Theme B (16:00 - 17:45) - Recap of Theme B, transposed (17:45 - 20:18) - Resolution/Coda, a somewhat impatient, but ultimately triumphant finale As you listen, there are a few things I would like to hear your opinions on: What effect does the music have on you? Does in conjure up an image? Or an emotional feeling? Does it tell you a story? This can be the piece as a whole, or a specific part or parts. What was your favorite part? What was your least favorite part? Do you have any comments or critiques on technique, e.g. harmony, melody writing, counterpoint, orchestration, voice-leading, etc.? How do you feel about the overall form? Is it effective? Do any of the parts seem impractical to you? I tried to challenge myself with this piece and as a result I wonder if I pushed the expectations of some of the instruments too far. For example, I included "optional" Eb and D clarinet parts for some of the higher clarinet parts, but I'm not sure if it was necessary. I'm also not sure if some of the string technique in Theme A and the "Infernal" section is practical or not. Do any clarinet players or string players have any insight? Do you have any comments of the quality of the performance in the audio file? I really want this to be a decent representation of how the piece would sound if it were performed live, since it is unlikely it ever will be. For example "I would have liked xxx instrument to be louder/softer here" or "The xxx instrument technique sounds sloppy here and could use some cleaning up" or "The balance in the xxx section was all out of proportion" I have included a score and welcome any constructive feedback on its presentation. And if you're like me it's a lot more fun to follow along with the score. Do you think "Sinfonietta" is a appropriate designation, or would you call it something else? If you could name this piece, what would you name it? Thanks for listening and I hope you enjoy! As always, if you liked something I did and want me to explain how I did it I am happy to do so. Or if you just want to tell me it's awful that's fine too. gmm

Yes, I am still struggling with noteperformer dynamic levels since, particularly in piano and strings, I feel the piano levels sound so much better than the rest of the dynamics, so I try to fiddle around with those quite a lot to suit my taste. I usuall have two piano tracks, one only for the score, and another one hidden, the one sounding, which has a lot of dynamic and weird accents to get the sound I want. It seems this time I did not do it properly hahaha, I have changed the audio a little to try to improve the dynamic levels. I also increased the volume of the bass. Thank for pointing out about the B section, I had not realized it felt more as a 3/2 than as a 3/2. I do not particularly mind that feeling but, in spite of being 12 measures long, I was feeling it was too short of a section. Now I realize probably the 3/2 rhythm feel makes the music feel like being on a faster tempo, so I extended that section with 8 extra measures as to not make it feel rushed. Thank you so much for your comment PaperComposer! 🙂

Sounds like a battle theme! I like the chromatic introduction you have - very appropriate. This piece makes good use of the i III progression after the 1 minute mark. I wish you had used more instruments! Could be way more epic with an orchestra. Nice job overall. I also have some RPG inspired music if you care to take a look.

A piano sounds robotic because it's not played by a human, not because of the mixing.

Sorry, it was intended for piano and orchestra but I rejected it. Only orchestra.but I'll ry to work on a general design (alternative form) first, then I'll go on writing. Thanks for your time.

It's ok as a piece but what's a natural sounding piano? I think you should address that question to your detractors. All pianos are slightly different usually by brand and whether upright or grand but unless tinkered with sound like pianos. They can encompass a huge range of music. If this one sounds robotic to them, so what? Perhaps their expectations are different. I heard a vibrant, energetic song that sounds perfectly well mixed. The instruments seem well differentiated, balanced.

My pleasure. I've been assisting a student with a mock-up in the past days, never mind lockdown - not my student - she is a student but her teacher sent her my way because she hates formal theory exercises. He'll still give her a pass on the grounds that an unhappy composer will get to hate the subject if not allowed some free rein. What's emerged from your proof-reading is that you obviously know your work well, something so often lacking in composers who throw stuff together oblivious of what it actually sounds like. I've witnessed a few embarrassing moments I can tell you!. Here's the definitive file (we hope).

I couldn't have said it better. This piece is the bar for the orchestral music here, bravo! I really gave this some thought with several listens, and since you took the time to break down the different sections as well as pose questions to what your curious about your writing, I'd love to dive deep into this one. I know you would like help with this score, but damn man it looks clean to me, I just don't have the experience to really critique it. I'll instead focus on compositional technique, content, overall impact, etc. I love this a lot. The fast descending lines in the strings (which are very prominent and notable throughout the piece) are a great introduction to the flourishing infernal theme. Are you Russian by chance? Haha I only say that because I hear lots of Stravinsky and Shostakovich influences, maybe some Mussorgsky? As PaperComposer mentioned, I heard some film influence as well. Yeah the John Williams is there a bit, but it's absolutely unique enough to where I only hear an influence to your musical voice. The slower spots remind me of The Rite of Spring, but again, I feel like you merely learned from his great use of ostinatos to create something that speaks only of you. I will say that I didn't care for the heavy string RHYTHM at around 0:37. I liked when you developed it later on, but the strong "ta ta ti-ti-ta" just kind of caught me off guard. Maybe if it had a tiny bit of syncopation...I dunno, could just be me. Your A themes are my favorite parts of your composition. I love the simple melody, it's chromatic and angular and uses sequences...it's awesome. I really enjoyed how it's a suspended crescendo, and how you took ostinatos to insane soundscapes. The harp and wind figures were a treat, you took advantage of the whole orchestra with your build up to the heavy brass melody. My only critique for this spot is that I wanted it to be longer. Maybe explore lighter textures to give the players a rest while you keep up momentum? Could just be a personal taste thing, but say...do you know Shosta 10th symphony? That killer heavy metal middle finger to Stalin 2nd movement? Check it out if you haven't, I learned a lot on how to make 4 minutes of music stay furious while not being terribly exerting to the performers...plus it's badass. I'm glad you marked your transitions. Honestly I feel like they can be as important as your thematic material. The warm orchestral texture was light and alluring, perfect for this moment. I liked the chromatic theme a lot, and the counter play with the strings was nice. The texture of the heavy ostinato was really well orchestrated, but again, I think the rhythm was a bit bare. Maybe a slight variety in orchestration with it? You could syncopate the rhythm slightly, but I kind of like the hits the way they are. The accents are good, but ever so often maybe through in a light hit with the upper strings. It would at least catch my ear to draw it back to it, because after a bit it's more background to what I'm trying to hear in the melody. I love the strings near the end getting to the development, reminds me of Night on Bald Mountain. Love this part. That sped up string ostinato reminds me of Duel of the Fates by John Williams, great build here! I like how you brought back the previous themes developed in a collage of different colors. Around the 10:13 mark was especially nice, I'm glad you brought a sense of comedy to that material. The pizz sections and muted brass overall brought a dimension that your piece needed at this moment. You have a great gift for creating suspense. The string lines leading to the lush brass are something that I strive for in my writing. I love your overall balance too; you bring in Mahlerian melodic fragments in to create beautiful touching moments. Ah yes, back to my scraggy. This spot even had some Danny Elfman likeness to it. This was about the same length as the previous A section, and ya I know it was a recap but I wanted more of this! Some of your most interesting material to me happens with the A theme, especially the crescendos, possibly draw them out a bit more? Sounded good, not much to say here This is the one spot that I didn't care for too much. It's still good, but personally I felt like a crescendo with your A theme and transition didn't want to lose that momentum. It could just be the pervasive heavy accents again, and you do such a brilliant job with orchestral coloring around all of that, but I just didn't feel the effect you were going for. It could also be maybe an adherence to the extended sonata form, idk. Something I though could be cool would be having your B theme the way it is, but maybe motif-like pieces of the A theme dispersed throughout? Sorry to keep bring up Shostakovich, but that man was a genius and I can think of a few spots he does this well. I like the idea of the triumphant finale, and you sure as hell pull this off well. But, to be honest, I knew it was coming. The orchestral texture of rapid violin high notes with a luscious brass melody is something that works, I just could smell it :P I hope I didn't sound too critical. Even though my profile won't show, I've been around this site since around 2008, and this is far and away one of the greatest pieces I've ever heard here. It was hard at moments to find anything critical; I first heard this and was blown away. Anything I had to say as "constructive criticism" is merely subjective and nit picky. You have created a masterpiece as far as I'm concerned, and this piece is one of the reasons I'm happy to be back at this site. Not trying to sound like too much of a gmm fanboy 😜

I really like the slow build you have in the beginning. The introduction segues nicely into almost a kind of cadenza for the piano although I know the cadenza-proper comes much later. For me listening without the score a second time allows me much better to hear the melodies. I feel like the piano figurations should be more based on the melody instead of just arpeggios like you have at 7:02. I mean that's a great moment you have where the orchestra hits a chord and the piano solos a bit and then repeats. The same kind of thing happens at 9:13 where the piano just plays arpeggios. I guess they're great opportunities for showmanship but they would be more memorable imo if they were based on a melody. The flute melody you have after the piano cadenza reminds me of Rachmaninoff. It develops nicely on the piano and I wouldn't call it a copy by any means. But I guess there are in fact many places where the piano does base it's figurations on a melody such as 16:50. Almost no need to say that overall this is an outstanding concerto! (listening for the 3rd time) The passionate A theme is nicely contrasted by the rushing figurations at 2:53. I love the clarinet melody you have at 4:12. The slow build at 7:40 develops nicely into another instance where the piano figurations are based on a melody at 8:24. The piano at 9:00 is brilliant. 10:32 is a bit arpeggio heavy but I guess it can't really be avoided sometimes in this style of concerto. I like the gradual way you bring the piano out of it's cadenza while at the same time avoiding the customary tonic 6/4 chord and trill. I'm guessing that the coda starts at 16:26. Thanks for the music!

Dang! Going to start off my paragraph here with the compliment that I listened to the whole 17 minutes! You should really walk away feeling awesome that you wrote this, and despite what I say below I love this piece of music and I have massive respect for you. Time lengths scare me, but your music definitely washed me into it very well. I can hear the glaring similarity in tone and power to Rachmaninoff's 2nd, which you say is one of your favorite composers in your bio, but it is almost uncanny. My biggest problem with the piece is that, while of course they are your ideas, there is just this off feeling that I am just listening to another Rach concerto - instead of Camille's concerto! Take this whatever way you like, but the piece was epic on several scales and I am happy to meet another 17 year old clarinetist + composer! Pen pal me if you want lol seems like we have stuff in common. Your first 4 minutes really had me hooked, but I feel this piece fell under what I consider the "just keep going" mentality so many composers do. The music I have grown to love is music that is concise and knows when to call it quits. IMO, no piece of music (er, more like movement of music) ever needs to be more than 10 minutes long. There is just so much lost in my memory that I literally can't remember your ideas and moments because there were so many. I think it is cooler to pick and choose the best ideas from the grape vine instead of stacking them all into one giant piece. Length is something I have noticed a lot of stuff late-romantic and earlier have trouble with (maybe the handwritten scores didn't help). Totally subjective to me, though, but most composers I listen to (Ravel, Debussy, Adams, Reich, Poulenc) know when to end their music. My most recent piece, the first movement of my Suite of Minimalism, wraps up at just 4 minutes 30 seconds. There are so many variations I meshed together to create a cohesive package of sound flavors for the listener, and I did this on purpose following my mentallity listed in this paragraph. Your work is finished, and I do not want you to go and delete 12 minutes of this just to fit into my critique. I can't tell if you are using noteperformer or some other sounds but they sound really great. Kudos to you on this big project, and I hope you take a few minutes to go listen to that piece I mentioned above that I wrote + leave your take. Thanks for the fun listen 🙂! - Evan

Oops, sorry about the accidentals. No excuse for sloppy work. I checked and found a few - most I hope. If you find any more let me know the instruments and bar numbers. Cheers. Here's the new file.......On the earlier one, I left out a few bars at the end because I hadn't time to look at the dynamics (though the articulations are right). You may as well have this bit as well. (Aside: this is a weird site. I thought I'd be able to replace the original file a couple of posts up by doing an edit.. But I can't, hence it's here!)

Dude almost sounds too much like the Fm Nocturne. A bit of the B theme in Fantasie Improptu as well? 😄 It's a great study though, it's always a great strategy to start with what one of your favorite composers has already written. I hope you've learned a lot from your studies, I hope you'll stick around and share more as your progress as a composer. Thanks for sharing!

Here's my entry. It took a lot longer to notate than I thought, but I've written about 1.5 minutes.