Symphony No. 1 (under construction)

Temporary version of my first symphony.

Symphony No. 1 (under construction)

Stirring work. I love your ideas and the way you handle them. My only concerns are with your wind parts - some of the passages you have solo instruments playing against quite a contingent of brass instruments - audibility? One structural thing as well: your quasi-fugato passage cuts off rather rapidly. Perhaps you should expand on that and then transition it into your development?

Stirring work. I love your ideas and the way you handle them. My only concerns are with your wind parts - some of the passages you have solo instruments playing against quite a contingent of brass instruments - audibility? One structural thing as well: your quasi-fugato passage cuts off rather rapidly. Perhaps you should expand on that and then transition it into your development?

Hm, guess you're right about that quasi-fugato part. But about that wood against brass thingy, could you be more specific?

Well, for every 1 brass you have playing... you need at least 3 woodwind to compete - and be heard. Especially when you have the brass blaring. Also, dynamically... don't orchestrate your dynamics based on your playback speakers! You'll get a much different effect in real performance!

Ah, didn't know that.. I'll reduce at least those unisono parts for 4 horns.. Thanks for that advice!

Great textures, overwhelming brass. Good ideas.

Hi Henk

I have listened sofar to the first posted (thus) second movement.

Some remarks. I really love the romantic harmonic language. I sense some Brahms. You was the guy orchestrating a piano sonata of his, right?

Sometimes the harmonies are a bit cheesy, cliche (like ms 57). No harm done, just not my style ;). An final note on harmony concerns chord in 6 position, and at the same time the 3rd in the melody. This occurs in ms 2, which is no real problem, but I think the occurrence at ms9 (the both c#s) could be improved. I realize there is no need to comply to an old common practice rule like this, but somehow it feels like a break with the idiom you have chosen.

The passage 10-14 is harmonicla almost equal to a passage from Mozarts Requiem (opening movement). Is this intentional. I like the way you speed up the harmonic progression by adding quarters to the bass. I think the final ms (14) could be a little bit better if you continue to add quarters which I suggest to do like this: e4 a4 a'2. (I hope you can read lilypond) The Cello and CB going an octave higher than now can even increase the tension you create, and fit into the higher register of the other strings.

A more structural remark. It seems to me you repeat some sentences sometimes to literal. There is for instance a little type error in ms 56. The same error you copied to ms 64. I think the CB needs to play an a# in stead of g#.

In this case you varied a bit in texture, which is really good, but could be exploited even more, I think.

The lovely melody at ms 14 oboe could use some legato phrasing. This is one of the few places that lack articulation in an otherwise very tidy and good readable score!

So far the first part of my review. I thought it was great. Love to hear some other works in time! Keep up! :D

JRCramer, thanks for such an extended post :)

It's a good advice to change those both c#s. About Mozart's Requiem, it was not intentional. I can't really remember it's opening movement now, but it's more inspired by a part from the Lacrimosa of the same Requiem.

About those Cello and CB, I know what you mean, though I can't read Lilypond. I'll consider it.

Ah, that type error! I already discovered it and hoped nobody would see it, I already removed it.

I'll upload the new version as soon as possible.

Looking forward to your second review!

Thanks

You dont need to change both c#, as long as the third is not doubled. You can keep the c# in melody and change the bass. But I think you'd rather keep the bassline as it is, and alter the melody ;)

About mozart, you are right. I was in doubt wheter it was the lacromosa or the opening movement. I thought the lacrimosa had a texture with tuplets, and since they were not available in your score I figured it should be the opening movement. Well, I was mistaken. Happens sometimes ;)

I have not had the time to review the first movement thoroughly. At first glance it is a bit to happy for my taste. I like the dark gloomy feel for your second movement. But I will try to ignore those personal preferences. To be continued.

Jaap

Ah! A symphony! I love reviewing these. Of what I heard, I thought I was listening to the lost Tchaikovsky symphony, to be frank. There's some terrific moments in here that really are nice. Contrary, there are also some not-so-good things.

Obviously the first movement is incomplete, hence why it stops in the middle of the development. You have some lovely ideas here. At first, I was wary about the triplet "jig-like" melody, but it grew on me as the exposition progressed. I think your sonata form is lovely except for the repeat. The repeat wasn't necessary as it stands now. While I would come back to the first theme after the Bass Clarinet solo (a very inventive choice, I might add), I wouldn't do a direct repeat, instead something a bit more truncated and more fun than what you had before. Keep the momentum going rather than reverting back, in other words. The biggest problem I found orchestration-wise was the brass. You left them out until the development? Why?! While I may understand you wanted a "lighter" exposition, why just leave them out altogether? I think some very interesting colors and combinations could be garnered by adding some brass here and there, especially the horns. I'd venture to say the brass can be even more "bouncy" than the woodwinds. What really got me was how incredibly the mood changed at measure 69. The holding off of the brass was almost too effective. It was too much too soon. That's why a more gradual buildup, even in the bouncy character, would be helpful. Make the transition into the dark wild stuff more purposeful, I guess would be the best way to say. Don't just say "Ok, now we have this jig, and here we have this dark forest" (which reminded me sometimes of Night on Bald Mountain). I will commend you though, once you reached measure 69, you did not disappoint. The music is great and exciting! And the orchestration was very good. (You could maybe have given the English Horn something more meaningful, but this is a tutti section after all.) I really would have liked to hear that wild stuff extended for a while, at least a substantial part of the development. I am eager to hear the rest of the movement when its compete.

The largo was a bit harder to like for a few reasons. The first was a bit of voice-leading and simply harmony problems that fouled it up. I like the idea of using opposite-direction scales in the top and bottom lines, but more often than not, the scales either clash or when they line up, the will line up in octaves leaving a substantial hole in the middle of it. For example, in measures 1-3, you have a delicious rich string timbre with no holes in it, then suddenly, in measure 4, there's this whopping octave that sticks out like a sore thumb. I don't think the scales are the problem either, its the "other stuff" like the violas who have these lines in between. It needs some adjusting. Measure 14 starts some fantastic orchestration with the added horns, a wise choice I think, a very rich sound there. The oboe melody is very good: because its so simple its easy to remember and easy to mess with in development. I would stick some slurs on it though, to keep a consistent legato feel. At measure 26, you start to feel the lacking of the 3rd trumpet and 3rd trombone. Why didn't you add them? A solid brass chorale was needed here but none was available. :( The next section is lovely with the ever-changing harmonies, good job!

Measure 50 is where things started to go haywire I thought. The melody at 52, frankly, seemed very uninspired. I don't think it was so much the melody but the harmony underneath it. The progression is very funny here. Consider revising it. The canonic treatment in the English Horn (finally something meaningful for the instrument!) was very nice. Here is why I say its the harmony and not the melody itself. You have a very nice canon here where the melody works.

Measure 72, you're going to have some MAJOR balance problems; the brass will overpower everything as written. I LOVE the unison horn line, do NOT remove it, as you thought of doing above. This is a fantastic moment for the horns to shine here. The only line that will get lost is the 16th note figure in the Clarinets and Oboes. What I would do instead of all these held notes in the upper winds and strings, I would take the current Violin I/II line and double it in the flutes and piccolo, possible 8va, then double the current oboe and clarinet lines in the violas and make the oboes and clarinets unison. So do not trade between the oboes and clarinets, just have both groups play both sets of the 16th note figure. Also, here is another spot where a 3rd trumpet and 3rd trombone are desperately needed. If you remove the held notes, the chord is somewhat incomplete. That is simply fixed by adding the third note in the chord to the dotted 8th/16th rhythm in the current brass. That will give it that classic triadic quality, much more ominous and almost militaristic.

The fugotto at 88 was pure gold! AH! It's amazing. The problem is..... it really shouldn't be there. It simply does not fit in this movement...at all. It was totally unexpected and unwanted really. I just heard this massive military horn line blaring away and now we have a Brittenesque fugue from "Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra"?! Yuck! Like the first movement, it was a mood shift that was far too drastic. I would just eliminate it all together. A clever idea might be to move that section to either the 1st or 3rd movement of the symphony so you have a subtle melody connection between movements. That way, your work doesn't go to waste. Not all jewelry has gold in it, only the right kind.

Measure 104 with the parallel horns was not good. I didn't like the effect and it made you look lazy as the composer. The woodwind lines on top of the horns after were good, but the parallels just didn't work. I would either write it in a proper chorale setting or leave it out. The very ending didn't make sense to me at all. I would have loved to see a reverse of your opening where you have the scales going in opposite directions. This time, have the violins coming down and the vlc/bass going up. Perhaps something to think about?

One pet peeve of mine, don't split like instruments onto separate staves. Its unnecessary and clutters the score. Put flutes 1 and 2 on one stave, Horns 1, 2 etc. Your rationale for this should not be "its easier to make parts from." It shouldn't matter one way or the other. A score is a score, and should look as clean and clutter-free as possible. In regard to that, you have done a very good job. Just get rid of those extra lines.

Overall, there's some lovely work here. Musically it is sold, no question. Most of the stuff I just mentioned is detail work. I look forward to hearing some more movements and revisions to the old ones! Good luck and Happy Composing!

Wow! Another long post! Guys, great.

But first, Jaap, that happy feeling of the first movement was intended. It will turn darker and darker towards the 2nd movement. Looking forward to your next post, as I already said. ;)

Tokkemon,

I do not know Tchaikovsky's lost symphony, will listen to it once.. :innocent:

About your repeat comment, I think I do agree, it gets too boring now. I'm not sure how to continue that part, I'll see. A more gradual buildup could be tried over there. I think I repeat theme I with violins with basses with that same motif as vlns. 1 in the beginning. Some harmonic buildup or something..

About more wild music, it's my plan to do some Beethoven-like dramatic things, but we'll see ;)

The Largo. About measure 4, you're right. The violas are going to play an A, and the Vlns. II will play a C probably. Hm, a 3rd trumpet and trombone, would be nice, yes. But wouldn't the brass be too loud in tutti parts then? Thanks about that tutti part, I like it too :)

About ms. 50 etc. The harmony is a little standard indeed, this part was rather quick-written and needs some improvement. About which progression are you talking here?

The tutti section, ms. 72, the flutes and piccolo are already doubling the violins in my newer version (not uploaded). That doubling by violas is a very good idea, those lower strings have quite boring parts here. (It was like 'Oh, yeah, something at the bottom of the page..) You've almost convinced me about that 3rd trumpet and trombone, but I'm afraid it will get more difficult to get everyting balanced..

Ahh, the fugue-like thing. :P You're absolutely right, but I like it.. :P But perhaps I can move it to the trio part of Mvt. III. I'll consider that.

About that parallel horns, it's a kind of joke to my music teacher. When we sing 'Silent night' with our music class, he just plays around on the piano. He often adds some carillon-like things and he never wants to show how that works. Well, I found on wikipedia how it works and I wanted to show it here :P. Which was perhaps not a good choice.

What you said about shared stafes. It's going to happen when my symphony is done. For now, it's useful.

Thanks for such an extended post! ;)

I uploaded a new version of my 2nd movement, no fugue anymore, but another short piece in it's place. I think this fits better, but I'm not sure.

My first two movements are 'finished' - meaning I reached the last bar - but I still have to tweak some things perhaps. Listen, comment, suggest, or don't. ;)

I updated Movements I and II, and added sketches of III and IV.

Listen and comment please :innocent:

view observations by the 3rd movement

- balance problems at ms 21. 3 times forte brass, against a mf woodchoir. I am not certain if that will work. Possible because of the different texture, but I dont think its the most effective orchestration possible...

- ms 29, 1 trb ff, and 1 bsn f. This wont work. Above that, the rich tone of the trombone will be impoverished by the bassoon. give the bassoon rests, or something else.

- before the fine is a nice rhythmical section. good.

- the trio has two themes. the chordal and a fugal one. This is making the structure of this movement kind of blurry. how are these related? maybe in other movements? the fugal theme is interesting and has lots of potential. Too bad it never makes it to a development...

overall I feel you modulate a lot, and then also write new accidentals. I would try to limit that a bit, or organise the keys a bit more, since it now feels like its without direction.

keep up the good work. When is this to be finished (its a school project right?)

Yes, the 3rd movement needs a lot of work. I'll closely to that orchestrations problems later. You're right about the fugue, I want to extend it. The fugue theme is a new theme, the chordal theme is theme II from mvt. 1.

About those modulations, should I cut out those 'official' new keys then? You know, the obvious ones..

This school project should be finished before 28 april. I hope I can finish it, my teacher is also satisfied with 'Unfinished Symphony and Sketches' or something, but I'm not. Of course I'd finish it later, but I want my school project to be done.

Thanks for your advice and what are your thougts about the small sketch for Mvt. IV?

Hi henk

on the fourth movement: what do you want it to be, what form? free, sonata, rondo?

The material is not so clear yet. the first theme is I guess from ms 1 (or 3?) - 7. Then there is the transition part, with the accents and the cheesy Db (not my taste). then a nice interplay (ms 9, 10) but still part of the transitional section. And then in a sudden you move to Db, with a new theme, ms 13. This exposition is clear, some variations, fine. again the Btheme in c minor, and a transitional piece, with the accents. Thus sofar.

I typed this all out, to make clear it feels a bit random, undirected. Like you often variate of something, or you are doing a lot of transitional sections, whith no real direction. The section with the accents feels like "hey, how could I fill the gap between A and B theme?"

I think you can do better, (like you re-use material in ms 27/8 to modulate)

So, its a bit similar to my previous post, I think you should organize the themes and keys a bit more.

some other notes:

* a-natural in ms 23 should be beses

* ms 14/15, quint parrallel between bas and soprano. And why is V2 playing the same notes as the bass...

prove that you can move from any key to any other is nothing new, since reger...

I hope this is helpful... anyhow, keep up! I'll follow your progress.

I edited the third movement

I think that this is an incredible effort. This symphony has great melodies but is short. I'm currently writing a symphony and mine will be short also, although my melodies aren't half as good as these. I finished the second mvt. and today I will be polishing the 1st mvt. and hpfully begin my third mvt. Keep up the great work!

P.S. this symphony doesn't seem temporary it's pretty good already!

Thank you! Is your symphony on YC? I'm working on my 4th mvt, but I'm rather busy with school exams right now. I'll finish it this summer I hope!

Good luck with your symphony!

My first two mvts are on YC currently. Check them out! Please comment them! I the third is coming in a very short amount of time and I intend to finish the fourth today! And again, great work, I put your symphony on my iPod(yep, it's that good)

My first two mvts are on YC currently. Check them out! Please comment them! I the third is coming in a very short amount of time and I intend to finish the fourth today! And again, great work, I put your symphony on my iPod(yep, it's that good)

I'll check your first movements! I uploaded a new 4th movement, which is still unfinished.

And thank you again! :)

Ok guys, I renewed my 4th movement totally, it's still not finished, please comment :thumbsup:

I made new recordings with EWQL and Reaper, I hope it sounds better now. Still no advices for the 4th movement?

I made new recordings with EWQL and Reaper, I hope it sounds better now. Still no advices for the 4th movement?