Serenade for Karen Friedman

Here is my first completed symphonic piece (though I have several long uncompleted ones). It is a three-movement serenade for someone I recently met who inspired me with her every-day inadvertent poetry.

I composed it over the last three months, the brunt of the work being done in the past month. It took about 90 hours total to write. It's 21 minutes long, and employs ideas from many musical eras, but primarily classical and impressionist.

The first movement was the last one I wrote. After the other two were described as "cinematic" by my friends, I decided to focus more on notes and less on texture. I'd say it is the most subtle of the three. None of them are in any particular form intentionally.

The second movement is slow, dramatic, and melancholy. It develops a single thematic idea throughout the whole piece, which I am quite proud of. It was the first of the three I wrote.

The third movement is my favorite, sandwiching a slow, surreal section between two fun and exciting ones. I think the ending is especially strong (which is why I put it last).

First movement: molto allegro (pdf)

Second movement: adagio (pdf)

Third movement: allegro / andante (pdf)

I'm interested in hearing feedback about any aspect of the music, but mostly I'd like to hear things that could immediately improve it rather than "things to do next time" (those are valuable too, though). I'd also like to know if I've written things that would be impossible (or needlessly hard) to play, if I've used eg. slurs appropriately, etc. That editing-type stuff I'd say is my weakest area.

Enjoy and thanks for listening!

Luke

Hi Luke,

First movement:

Wow, this is very impressive!

Extremely well thought out themes; and well executed; perfect orchestration and clear sections.

This really is amazing - I don't know your background but you have a great talent.

This obviously belongs in "Major Works". The second section sounded more coloristic and the first and third more formal/classical. Your grasp of the orchestra is beautiful. Your creative spectrum is near romanticism ...

Very impressive! - I got my eye on you.

BTW, I would not change a thing in my opinion. The detailing of scoring can be very exhausting but worth it for a piece of this caliber. There are others here that will probably dive into your PDF soon and critique - a good way to learn.

I would demand a live performance soon!

Wonderful!

Michael

This is very interesting musically. I particularly like the little Debussy quote in the 1st movement.

The scores, however, are an awful mess. You really should take some serious time to clean them up.

There are a few questionable orchestration moments (some range issues for flutes, for example - too low to be heard effectively against the rest of teh ensemble in spots).

And the fact that you put all your violins on a single staff makes for both some very difficult reading, and again raises questions about the actual orchestration of the string part.

What happened to the trombones? it ways trombone 1, b ut there are two notes, and then the other staff says trombone 2 but that one ALSO has 2 notes.. so is it trombone 1 and 2? or trombones 1 through 4?

I'm most concerned about the orchestral inconsistancies. Before this can be performed, (after cleaning up the score) you will need to make a final decision on the exact forces required for this piece, and stick to them.

Still, lovely music.

Do you use anything Garritan?

M

QcCowboy - Thanks for your comments. This is the kind of thing I was looking for. There are spots that I know how to clean up, but then others (re e.g. flutes) which I would not have thought of. The trombone staves are just mislabeled, there are four trombone parts. But often when I'm writing it's hard to think about such details, so things get scribbled down which may not make sense. I think a fair amount of the horn stuff needs reorchestration.

The violin thing was a symptom of Finale being hard to work with. For example at the end of the last movement when there are I think 6 different violin parts, should I split each one into a separate staff?

You're right that I need to decide about the "exact forces". I am quite ignorant as to the actual layout of a typical orchestra. For example, how many flutes are there usually? Does a flautist usually double on the piccolo?

Is there a good reference for finding out such things?

below is the list of instruments in a typical symphony orchestra, listed in the order in which they appear in a score.

(information in brackets for woodwinds is for a larger orchestra with woodwinds by 3):

2 flutes (2nd doubles on piccolo.. or a third performer can be assigned the piccolo)

2 oboes (like flute, 2nd doubles cor anglais, or a 3rd can take it)

2 clarinets (same as above for bass clarinet)

2 bassoons (again for contrabassoon)

4 horns - generally, horns 1 and 3 are called "high horns" (getting the upper part in harmony) while horns 2 and 4 are the "low horns" (getting the lower material).

2 or 3 trumpets

3 trombones (2 tenor and one bass)

1 tuba (not always present)

timpani (NOT played by any other percussionist - this is ONLY played by the timpanist)

percussion - anywhere from 1 to 7 players, depending on the size of the orchestra

violin 1

violin 2

viola

celli

basses

the string section requires 5 staves, one for each "section" listed above. if you divide 1st violins, then both those staves require an additional bracket, which will be called "violin 1". same thing for any of the other strings. any divisi will mean adding a bracket in the score. it MUST remain perfectly clear WHICH section of strings is playing which line.

four trombones is needlessly large, by the way.