Hello @Matthew M, this is a piece I enjoyed from the first measure on! This might be the case since you – as a fun fact – used the same first four notes (V – I – II – III) as I did in my contribution, while in another rhythm! And there is just another similarity, you have set the poem to music and used an instrument – I suppose an oboe – as the substitute for the human voice. Melodies Themes Motives and Harmony Chords Textures: The piece contains wonderful melodic themes or motifs that are, on the one hand, memorable and recurring, and on the other hand are slightly modified or varied, so that the texture flows continuously and never becomes boring. Form Development Structure Time: I would describe the form as an „introduction“, followed by two „stanzas“ of the song (whereas it is the twofold repetition of the entire poem), and a „coda“. Before the poem is recapitulated, there is a beautiful modulation from G major to E major and a meter change from 4/4 to 6/8, so that the second “verse” has an even more brighter and cheerful mood than the first. All in all, it’s a beautiful structure that makes the 4:15 minutes of the piece fly by seamlessly. Originality Creativity: The piece is original, creative, and memorable - not due to extravagant instrumentation or surprising effects, but simply because of its beauty! Score Presentation: There is one thing I noticed in the score. You have (nearly) not made any articulation or bowing markups using slurs throughout the piece – except in the soprano (or oboe) voice which is treated as the vocal part. And furthermore, that voice - if it is really considered to be the vocal part - has a somewhat inconsistent usage of slurs and beams: In vocal score notation it is important to distinguish whether a single syllable is represented by a single note or whether multiple notes are sung for a single syllable (i.e., a melisma). There are two possibilities: In older, classical scores eighths and sixteenth notes are notated with flags (not beamed) for a single syllable, but if there are multiple notes to be sung for a single syllable, those notes are beamed together. No slurs at all (except for quarter or longer notes). In contemporary music, beams are used to show the rhythmic pattern, regardless of the text. However, in that case slurs indicate whenever multiple notes should be sung for a single syllable (and nowhere else). So, for example, in mm. 26-27 there should be only one slur in mm. 27 around the first two notes A and C denoting that there is a melisma on „love“ to be sung as two notes. In mm. 29 the first slur is correct, the second not. In mm. 30 no slurs at all. Mm. 31 is correct, two melismas. And so on (all according to „modern“ notation). On the other hand, I would appreciate slurs for the other instruments to express articulation or bowing. Instrumentation Orchestration Playability: A „traditional“ instrumentation which is used effectively and does not show any playability issues. Execution of Given Challenge: Even if you did not stress on depicting the different moods one could read from the three stanzas of the poem, you have nailed it, to evoke imaginations of a summer’s day, beauty and love. Well done! Taste: A beautiful, calming piece which never gets boring, even after listening to it multiple times. Moreover, the longer I listen to it, the more subtle details I conceive. Melodies Themes Motives Harmony Chords Textures Form Development Structure Time Originality Creativity Score Presentation Instrumentation Orchestration Playability Execution of Given Challenge Taste 10 10 10 9 7.5 9.5 10 10 Average Score: 9.5