Konzertst

One of my favourite works for piano and orchestra from the early nineteenth century is Carl Maria von Weber's 'Konzerst

That settles it, yea. The 'c' is there. Although I think you accidentally left out a t, but we know that bit anyway.

I haven't read all the comments yet, but I think I agree with most everything that's been said. I like this piece, and I think you stay quite solidly in one style from start to finish. I like the rhythmic effects of the piano (which seems almost simple at a glance) and I think you did very well with it.

One concern though. Is it possible to play two trills in the same hand at the same time? You have this written 2 or 3 times, and it doesn't seem even possible to play. Perhaps if you have a tremolo or something, I can see that working, but you have to distinct trills to be played by the same hand. Just seems (quite literally) like a handful to me.

I think it's very good. The piano part is essential and superb. The piano's runs and thirtyseconds make the piece. I would love to hear it live. This was the best orchestral piece I've heard in some time in the Major Works forum. Good job and good luck in the future.

Your next piece should be a solo piano rhapsody. The piano part here reminds me of the essential repertoire work, Gypsy Rhapsody.

EDIT: The orchestration is very professional. Normally when I hear an orchestral piece here at YC, after a fermata, the continuation is poor and lacking substance, but you pick up silence very well.

Thanks, Nightengale and Creation for your reviews, and for listening :blush:

I'm glad you both like it.

Sean - did you mean the piano part was simple? It is fairly straightforward, yes, but it's definitely not easy. But maybe you mean the rhythms were simple.

Thanks for the compliments, Creation. I'm glad the fermatas work for you.

And yes, double trills are possible.

Thanks again for your time, guys.

Wow. This is a marvelous piece of music, and probably one of the best I've seen on YC, as far as compositional technique goes. Your orchestrations are traditional, but impeccable, as is your sense of harmony and timing. And the fermatas don't bug me at all.

Listening to this piece the first time through, I got the sense that while each of your ideas was strong and compelling, that they were all going by too quickly and that this movement was full of too many ideas. But on a second run-through I've decided that's not quite what I mean to say. It's not the number of ideas that you use in this piece -- it's the way you set up the entrance of each new idea. At the entrance of each new idea, you have composed a big cadence along with a sharp textural change. Such techniques cause the ear to believe that this new idea is going to be the Next Theme of the piece, and the problem is that this happens about four or five times throughout the course of this piece.

What I'm trying to say is that it's not the amount of material that my ear didn't agree with (for certainly Beethoven used just as much in some of his sonata-allegro movements, including everyone's favorite Eroica); instead, it's the way you treat the entrances of the new material. Not all the new material receives a thorough Development in the classical sense -- and this is not a bad thing, you just don't want to mislead the listener into thinking that each New Theme is going to get a lot of development.

To that end, I would suggest listening through lots and lots of (and then some more!) Mozart and Beethoven sonatas, with a special ear (and eye, if you can get scores) for the development sections. Watch how they worm their way in and out of keys both close and distant, and trace the morphing of each theme throughout each. Then as an exercise I suggest taking a Beethoven or Mozart sonata you really like and writing your own development section based on the composer's exposition. (No, this is not heresy; I'm sure either of them would have approved. They'd take it as a compliment, you see.) This gets you thinking more about how you can use what came before to create what comes next.

I hope you're taking your composition studies seriously, Daniel. This work shows a really great sense of what it means to write music. At this point I want to jump on my soapbox and deliver a speech (in your favor) about compositional styles, but since no one has raised the objection I would have expected, I'll hold off for now.

Again, keep up the awesome work!

Thanks a lot! For the review, and for the helpful comments.

I understand what you're saying about themes, and development, and I will have to give this serious consideration for future pieces. Especially those in sonata form. This piece is not strong on form, and it is sectional like you say, but what you say is v. important.

I think that's a great idea - writing a development for a sonata. I'm going to do that - after I've done sufficient analysis.

I am finally taking my composition seriously. I recently made a last minute change of my university choice (from Chemical Engineering to Music) and now I am starting to knuckle down at it, and not treat it as a hobby.

Do you mean you expected people to object because it's too traditional?

Thanks anyway!

Thanks a lot for taking the time to listen and review, and I'm flattered by your comments :w00t: :D

hi daniel

i like this music very much

dark-@@

Thanks guys.

Palestrina: I just let it flow naturally, but it's a loose rondo anyway.

This was written over two years ago, mind, but I appreciate that both of you listened to it, and am very glad you liked it!

This was realy nice Daniel! sounded a bit griegish :) very nice music :)

This is quite an accomplishment! I can't see the score, so I'll comment just from listening.

The theme you introduce at :55 is great, and the way it is developed after that is really neat. My favorite part is around 2:00-2:20...the style reminds me of Schumann.

The section from 4:10-4:15 is a little jarring (sudden shift to minor, then back to major).

What an enjoyable piece though! I hope that you have the chance to hear it performed live.

Hello, Daniel!

Sounds like somebody's been listening to a lot of Classical/Early Romantic music!

I mean that in the very best way, of course!

The form worked fine for me. In fact, I like the idea of writing pieces and following where it feels it should go, rather than always setting out with a specific form in mind. It doesn't always work, but I think it does quite nicely here.

I like your use of melodic material and the way you distribute it amongst the whole orchestra. It keeps everything nice and fresh and constantly interesting.

Nice work!

Michael.

This is a great piece! I love the piano lines you have going on, and some of the piano lines are just fantastic - I would love to hear them played live. And to then pitch it against the orchestra as you do adds to its speciality.

Nice work!

This was realy nice Daniel! sounded a bit griegish :-) very nice music :-)

Thanks. :) I love how everyone gets something different from my pieces. I never thought of it as Grieg-ish, but I'm glad you do!

What an enjoyable piece though! I hope that you have the chance to hear it performed live.

Thanks, clark. I would love that too, though it's 2 years old, and I've moved on, so I've other stuff to try to get performed. Even so, I'd love to hear it live.

Michael/Asparagus: Thanks. You're right, it is inspired by late classical/early romantic. As I commented on an interview on Midi-Contest (I think... This piece won gold :D) I had been listening to Schubert's 9th at the time, and I think it had inspired/influenced me a wee bit.

For some people, planning ahead works. For me, I have a very general idea of the form, but really the specifics are all up in the air. That works for me, so I guess it's alright!

Thanks, Eddyster. :) Glad you enjoyed it.

Thanks to all for listening. I'm glad people are still getting something from this!!

Edit: I went and checked the site. It's now called www.composition-contest.com, and I'm still ranked #2 for top average score even though I haven't posted since April '07! Also, still the #3 best medal winner. Awesome.

Is there any way you could make a PDF

PDF please.

I'll get to it.

Why do you write in such an ancient European style? It's the *style* that bothers me, it just doesn't seem genuine.

Why did I? I was learning. And it seems genuine to me; it was my natural mode of expression at the time.

Was it really? I just don't find that believable unless you are from Germany and live in the 19th century. however, if this is an older piece and not representative of what you write now, I totally get that. Can you link me to a recent piece of yours?

By the way, I by no means am saying that this piano concerto is bad (by the way, ARE you German? I'm assuming so because of the German title).

No, I'm not. Are you English? You appear to be speaking English. (/just as facetious)

However, my favourite music is German, which is why the style is legitimate, even if the title is slightly stupid. (Though it sounds much better than Concert Piece or anything.)

Try these pieces for a better idea of what I'm currently progressing through (I'm obviously still learning, and evolving, stylistically):

http://www.youngcomposers.com/forum/hymeneal-17557.html

http://www.youngcomposers.com/forum/mirage-solo-cello-14184.html

Those are approaching my 'genuine' musical style, with Hymeneal being tempered by the need to write in a fairly harmonically clear style, as brass bands mostly demand that (as well as demanding that a piece be tonal).