Funeral March in C minor

I've had the themes for this in my head for a year now, playing it on the piano, and only a week ago did I decide to start writing it down for orchestra.

I composed this in four sessions of 10 hours each (from 2 PM to midnight), practically non-stop. It grew up to 15 minutes of music.

The piece is what the title says, a funeral march. It's meant to contrast feelings of deep, savage grief with heavenly utopias that are constantly brought down to harsh reality and exaggerated pain.

There's a brief moment of insanity near the end, maybe a little moment in which one might be deluded by one's own imagination.

The only justification I can give for the weird sound/orchestration at some points is that it's as close as I could get from what I wanted to hear. Not a valid point, but there you go. :P

Here's the mp3

Here's the score

I'm sorry again, it's dirtier than Bette Midler's jokes...

I love it! Especially the bells! It's so dramatic! The Strings have extrememly nice parts too! Very Berlioz! But the brass! That was just legendary!

The theme was fantastic! Very foreboding! The dissonances were just perfect!

I love the "happier" parts with the very high string bits, very nice contrast.

There is one part with two points of silence that I think could have benefitted from a constant tremolo pedal in the bass. Somewhere near the 8.. something mark...

The longer quiet part around halfway through the 11 minute mark's part is too quiet I think, it's almost like silence.

The only other thing I would change is the number of staves! It's a bit big when you have one for each instrument!

Over-all, I absolutely adore this piece! It's fantasticly done and I didn't think any part sounded "weird" with the orchestration as you stated in your original post, though that's just me! :P

The melodies are so beatuiful and the atmosphere is absolutely perfect! If I were you, I would be extrememly proud of this fabulous piece of music!

Oh wow berlioz..this piece has a SPECTRUM-FULL of colors in it, so diverse in everything. I absolutely love it, the decieving quieter parts in the strings and the louder more haunting brass sections were lovely as well. There were sections where I just wanted to tear up and others squirm in my seat! Let's see..the bells in the beginning fit perfectly in the piece, reminds me so much of funeral bells. Great job overall..I have nothing to say negative about this.

You know what I think. The orchestration is wonderful and the contrast between themes is great, but some of the counterpoint in the middle section felt a little weird. The big crescendo you did before the fugue-ish part also felt a little bit too long.

I love the menacing use of the brass and that orgasmic D major chord (you know where that is).

Thanks to all so far! (I stress the "so far" :P)

There is one part with two points of silence that I think could have benefitted from a constant tremolo pedal in the bass. Somewhere near the 8.. something mark...

Uhm... If that's what I think it is, it DOES have the double basses doing a low pedal note, only not in tremolo. :P

The opening was brilliant! Very atmospheric!

The strings were very well used along with the brass! Simply sublime use of the brass. The flute could have been a little too bright in some places... the color wasn't very fitting around 1:20. The harmonies were a little drab until 2:20, to be honest, but the major sevenths and diminished chords gave it the spark of interest it needed. The section around 2:50 was very well placed, but I think that the strings playing that high would produce enough volume to overpower the winds at that register.

At around 4:20, I guess I could have used some change... the low register stuff was getting a bit tiring. Some oboe and trumpet exchanges in that section would give it the perfect punch, imo. However, I did finally begin to feel the march feel at this point and the orchestration was brilliant. Also, the repetitions began to overwhelm me as I think you intended.

At around 6:50 my ears were getting tired from the homophony too. If you are going to do this, you might as well throw in a new theme or a different variation of the theme to catch SOME interest :P . Maybe some chromaticism would help too. The harmony at 7:45 wasn't very convincing.

From there until 9:34, there wasn't anything that really stood out, good or bad.

At 9:34, the increased rhythmic interest helped. 10:50 was exactly the contrast that I needed to keep me listening. To be honest, that whole section from 7:45 to 9:34 didn't catch my interest at all, which is something almost essential in pieces of this length.

You did manage to beat the theme into my head though :D, so yay for that!

So, I gave my thoughts on it overall, and I really really think that it could benefit from more counterpoint or more harmonic changes. Look at Beethoven's Funeral March from Eroica, for example... it's so wry and sarcastic when it comes to death and the violins, winds, and brass all have long conversations about the topic. When worst comes to worst, the climax is given by extremely powerful string writing.

Good work, nonetheless!

Um. BWAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH is the best sound in the world. I have to say.

It was excellent.

...

I don't think there's anything you can say to convince him to get rid of the 'low grumbling in the brass'. :P

Don't fall for what Berlioz - your idol, I guess - and some "modern composers" could be sometimes hold accountable for (clever orchestral sounds for their own sake, but no substance, no "core").

If you think Berlioz has no substance or core, you're wrong. :P

But yes, I understand those things about orchestral colours. But it is all playable in the piano, I have done so for a year now until I decided to write it there. I know there are other issues.

I really enjoyed this piece. Especially the low grumbling parts because I am a brass player. Somewhere in the middle I got a little weary of the repetition in the strings but that's because I am impatient. Overall I thought it was amazing!

:)

How about adding a at the end of your quoting? :P

Berlioz - very good work -- you captured the atmosphere you wanted. The sparse textures were quite attractive.

I wish I could specify more but with orchestration I am a novice -- I am unsure right now I could even do half as well as you did here. I will say that the colors you drew seem a little worn as I have heard often the growling brass and chimes often used in film for somber, mournful or even forboding scenes. But write and study more to discover your orchestral voice --- you show much talent and good study done already.

Oh my God that was amazing! I'm working on a requiem mass right now in C minor and you totally just inspired me...but how did you get the recording to sound so good? I use sibelius 4 and it just doesn't sound right.

Oh my God that was amazing! I'm working on a requiem mass right now in C minor and you totally just inspired me...but how did you get the recording to sound so good? I use sibelius 4 and it just doesn't sound right.

He uses Garritan Personal Orchestra, a sample library.

I don't get why everyone is WOWing about this piece so much. It's good. But no more than a smash-togehter of Mahler and Berlioz. 3 timpani parts? That's excessive, just like Berlioz. The harmonies are nice, esp. on the more intense brass sections, but they die out far too quickly.

BTW, a real performance won't sound like the recording you gave us, just so you know. You're brass writing in particular will not sound like it is. It would be quite muddy rather than brassy. (Cuivre is only used in horns BTW.) Loose the bass clef in the 3rd and 4th horns too. Why do so many people do this? Is it a systemic problem with today's orchestration classes?

Good job, but it's not there yet.

HAHA! I actually thought the excessive timpani were cool justin, it is a march you know lol. To be quite honest with you, Mahler used 8 timpani in his 2nd..so it's not really too excessive here, however Berlioz (the real Berlioz) really did overdose on drums, I'd have to agree with you there.

HAHA! I actually thought the excessive timpani were cool justin, it is a march you know lol. To be quite honest with you, Mahler used 8 timpani in his 2nd..so it's not really too excessive here, however Berlioz (the real Berlioz) really did overdose on drums, I'd have to agree with you there.

Yah. I was referencing Berlioz on the overdoing of the drums. But all those low Cs won't be heard very well. And from my expericence, chords don't work so well on timpani, no matter what Berlioz says in his Treatiase.

I feel this piece has good ideas but needs refinement. The harmonies feel too static and fail to have a sense of arrival when a section repeats. I also feel the orchestration could be improved in many ways but it is difficult to explain without going into alot of detail. Suffice it to say, it could have more variety and idiomatic use of instruments. Do you think the high bassoons on page 4 is idiomatic? I find this figure sounds like the bassoon is doing a harp sort of thing. I also feel the piece is too long (or meanders too much) but there are some nice build ups - perhaps more variety in the orchestration and harmonies would help this have a sense of forward momentum.

Why would you start off with the low bass trombone on page 1 but then in the second repeat of that melody, give that figure to the bassoon ? From a structure point of view, it sounds like a step backwards dramatically rather than a build. Also, remember that if something is important, you should resist the urge to overuse it. Save it and the impact will be stronger. I am referring here to the growling brass. I am a bass trombone player so believe me I love that kind of stuff, but it tends to be gimmicky if overdone. Just an opinion. I think you have a lot of really good elements here that could be enhanced with more restraint. You can still have your big growls when you need them, but perhaps reduce the places where they aren't as important so they'll stand out more when they come in.

Dramatically, it reminds me a bit of Rachmaninoff's "Isle of the Dead". Note in that piece there is some big contrasting elements. Also notice how Rach keeps the piece moving forward. The climaxes are HUGE and nothing is lost by his reserving the huge orchestra he employed on that piece by being selective on when the big guns are brought in. Rach has his death theme and his nostalgia theme and in the climax they combine dramatically and in a very effective way.

Please don't optimize staves on the first page.

Overall, I agree with Justin - its a very promising start and a good concept but needs more refinement and editing. The melodies are strong and memorable - but it sounds like you might have rushed the creative process a bit and if you took more time with it, it will be a stronger piece. Overall, nice work. I hope you don't feel me too critical because I fall into many of the same traps that I point out here (and it usually takes someone else to point that out to me).

I don't know enough about orchestration to comment. But from a purely musical standpoint, I think that the rhythm of the theme is overused. You repeat the same ryhthm for the entire piece: you don't really elaborate on it, you don't introduce any new theme with a new rhythm. So it gets a little boring. Structurally, I might have ended it after that first really big climax after the Gb major section. The section in A major isn't really necessary and the redo of the climax is much less effective than the first. So basically, I would elaborate on the melody and shorten the piece. I did like it though, so keep up the good work.

I really enjoyed this peace.

The "Funeral March" feel you were aiming for was met very nicely in my opinion.

Loose the bass clef in the 3rd and 4th horns too.

Hmm I've been taught to use bass clef like this too... But only in the score not parts. The point is to make the reading a bit easier on the conductor.

Regarding the piece itself it is overall very good. One thing to be careful of I think is that some of your entries sound out of place.

Hmm I've been taught to use bass clef this too... But only in the score not parts. The point is to make the reading a bit easier on the conductor.

Regarding the piece itself it is overall very good. One thing to be careful of I think is that some of your entries sound out of place.

Well who ever taught you was wrong. It is not easier for the conductor to read horn parts that should be in treble clef. Always notate what's in the parts as it is in the score. If the parts are in treble, the score should be treble. Besides, horns are not bass instruments by default, so it makes little sense to make them ones.

Just to be clear about this:

You may notate a horn part in bass clef IF the part consistantly requires the use of multiple ledger lines.

The horn may not be a "bass instrument", however, it IS an alto instrument. meaning its range will cover notes going down to more than an octave below middle C (concert).

However, another correction: score and parts MUST use the same notation. if the score has the horn part in bass clef, then the horn part will also be in bass clef.

And whoever taught you that your goal was to make a part "easier to read for the conductor" has obviously not spoken to very many conductors.

What a piece! Such expression, yet such power. I like the contrast. It really captures everything associated with death.

so powerfull

like batman soundtrack

dark-@@

I loved the piece, especially the brass section! However, perhaps the strings repeated themselves a bit too much, you know, for example in that place where 1st violins begin, and 2nd violin takes over.

I use GPO as well, and I can`t help but wonder, how do you get the cuivre effect? I love that effect :) : most of the recordings I like, I like because of how loudly the brass plays when its needed, but how do you get it using GPO?

Overall, I think this piece is great! The bells shouted "Symphonie Fantastique", but I still liked it. Great job! :)