Concerto for Soprano Saxophone and Strings

I have just completed my first "major" work, a three movement, 18 minute concerto for soprano sax and strings. It's due to be performed in September, so I'd be very grateful if anyone felt like giving me some constructive criticism...being as 5 months is plenty of time to make any changes :D

This piece was written over the course of about 4 months, so there's quite a few different influences. The first movement's main theme was inspired by some of Gerald Finzi's works, while the middle section is shamelessly neo-classical! The 2nd movement owes alot to Poulenc (namely his clarinet sonata, 2nd mvt,). As for the 3rd movement...even I'm not totally sure where that came from! I was kind of trying to emulate the sort of Rondo form that's in the last movement of Mozart's clarinet concerto, and then mixed it with a bir of Dave Brubek! Plus I added in an improvised cadenza: something which has been sadly lacking since the end of the classical period.

Anyway...any kind of comment would be very much appreciated. :)

Thanks,

Andrew Hopper

whole concerto.sib

conc.mid

whole concerto.pdf

I listened to your midi version and looked atthe score. I thought that if you had to divide one section it would have been better to divide the violas. You have a lot of high added note string chords and you will get a better blend with violins and violas.The first cello part or sometimes the second is fairly high and will stick out of the textures. You often leave the bass fairly unsupported and I would have put more cello/bass doubling. I understand that there is a need to accomodate 4-5 note chords but often you have 5 string parts above middle C with the bass dangling down the bottom.

Finally with some of your string sforzandos at the start and then at the end third movement, I would double notes and put chords into the vln and vla parts to give weight. Otherwise some of the high violin1 notes I assume are sforzandos will sound like squeaks.

Oh yea and I forgot to say I really liked the Dave Brubeck 7/8 to 6/8 changes in the third movement. A great little theme.

Thanks for the tips on scoring. I'm a cellist, so I suppose I'm a bit biased in that instrument's favour! Plus there's an excess of cellos where I live, so I figured it would be best to split them. I'll find out how many violas there will be, and depending on that, I might write in a vla II part. I have an annoying tendancy to slip into polarised textures, which is something I should probably work on avoiding (or rather, saving for specific moments).

I'm not looking forwards to conducting the last movement though. From my experience, string players aren't so good at irregular time signatures!

nice music Andrew , i think it is better to put ur name on the midi file because if we want to download the file ur name will appear without write it again many times

The first thing I'm noticing is that your dynamics are not bold. In order to make your dynamics bold, when you press Apple+E to get expressions, keep holding Apple when typing your dynamic. That will give your score a better look, and it will be easier for the performers. If you're not on a mac, use the equivalent key.

Also, make sure you have a time signature at the beginning.

The work is being difficult and not playing well in sibelius, so I hope those two tips helped.

I would say that my main concern is that the solo part isn't particularly "saxophone-ish". Nothing about it says "this was written for the saxophone". You could use many different instruments there and not really cause any real change to the piece. Violin, clarinet, oboe, cello (8vb)... I guess I just want to try to get across that the solo part feels generic.

Other than that, I don't have any strong feelings about the piece.

I wish i could hear the piece at a live performance.Please add more dynamics.

<comment deleted>

I'm currently working on a second version, which includes another viola part (and therefore a bit of reharmonisation), and, yes, more dynamics! (something which I've always been far too lazy about...oops)

In reply to Flint's comment - I'm also a woodwind player, though I am a clarinetist mainly. Oddly enough, this meant I found writing for sax to be a bit of a challenge, mainly due to it's relatively limited tessitura (it can't even do 3 octaves...rubbish :laugh:). But I do have some idea as to how wind instruments are written for, and any guidance from you as to how to make something more "saxophone" would be very much appreciated!

I know alot of sax music makes use of the instrument's jazzy and "shmaltzy" sounds, but I chose the soprano sax deliberately for it's pure, singing tone.

Thanks for all your replies,

Andrew

Andrew, that actually makes a lot of sense to me now... when I look at the solo part, it uses a lot of clarinet clich

Oh, I forgot... the altissimo A before letter EE seems tacked on. Perhaps if you expanded the cadenza and worked up to that A instead? Right now it comes at you from left field.

The figure G thing is a very good point actually. I didn't think of that. I'll consult my soloist first (she is a VERY good saxophonist), but I may well change that.

To be honest, the entire cadenza passage is a bit "tacked on"! I wasn't sure what to do, so I just put the words "ad lib. cadenza"...mainly to make the soloist squirm, because I'm harsh like that (and, after working my way through some classical cello concertos, I feel that the improvised cadenza is something of a lost art). But I do see what you mean about the high A. I'll put in some impressive sounding arpeggios to lead up to it or something.

As for the bizzarre time signature: the main reason it's like that is because of phrasing really. The beat is felt as 4+3, 2+2+2. Using 2/4 and 5/8 might just make things even more complicated, although I do admit that writing everything in quavers (making the time signaures 7/8 and 6/8) would make it more readable. Besides, I've become desensitized to confusing time sigs after playing The Rite of Spring :D

Again, thanks for all your comments.

Hi Flint.

6/16 + 7/16 is completely different to 2/4 + 5/8. 6/16+7/16 is the actual feel of the music. I haven't looked at the score just heard the rhythm and it is a great little idea.

Andrew

No, it isn't. At that point, the beat (according to the notation in the score) is dotted eighth = (some number). How is it any different than quarter note = (same number) and making the notes triplet eighths?

I'll post an example from the score when I get home tonight.

EDIT: I'll correct myself... it wouldn't be 2/4 and 5/8, it would be 6/8 and 7/8 - played at dotted quarter = (some number).

That's what I get for posting from work and relying on my aging memory ;)

Yes that makes sense. I was only going on what I heard. But 6/8 or 6/16 is much of a muchness. Maybe 6/8 is a little less daunting on the page - less of a psychological stumbling block, where 6/16 suggests you are going to put your fingers into overdrive.

Yes that makes sense. I was only going on what I heard. But 6/8 or 6/16 is much of a muchness. Maybe 6/8 is a little less daunting on the page - less of a psychological stumbling block, where 6/16 suggests you are going to put your fingers into overdrive.

I believe that it's important for composers to understand that you don't get bonus points for making your music hard to read. I've seen countless pieces passed over simply for the fact that they "looked hard". This is especially important when attempting to get new orchestral works performed, since (close-minded) orchestras tend to pigeon-hole new works as "noise" and presenting them with a "difficult-looking" score just gives them another reason to not bother with it!

Composing is not (or should not be) about hearing a MIDI representation of your work - it's about hearing it played by real musicians. Only then do you actually find out if your music works and how it really sounds. Sorry to harp (HA!) on these points, but I really do want to see everyone here improve, and I believe my advice will help with that!

I see what you mean. I wasn't going out of my way to make the music "look hard"...it was the just way it turned out for some reason! But I'll probably turn everything to quavers at some point before the performance, just to keep the string players happy!

Sorry, Andrew, I didn't mean to imply that I was accusing you of that. My intent was to indicate that one should always look to present their music in the clearest way possible. Please take no offense.

No, don't worry, none was taken! Thanks for all your advice.