Symphony in A

Hello,

I posted an earlier iteration of this work some time ago. A lot has since formed. The general structure of the first movement is complete; I still intend to vary the recapitulation somewhat as I prefer to not simply repeat the second subject verbatim. But it is more or less done.

I have also made a start on the second movement. This movement has a slightly unusual disposition and is on the way for becoming an ambitious piece with its emerging structure in mind.

I am posting here in advance of completion to gauge people's feelings about the musical ideas. Perhaps if anyone has suggestions I would love to hear perspectives. Or even if you like it, that helps to say too. Composing is otherwise an activity for solitude!

Second movement is @ 05:40.

Thanks!

Markus

Score.pdf

Edited 9 hours ago9 hr by Markus Boyd

Hello! I have completed a first listen and looked over the score. I hope to do a deeper dive and analyze the score thoroughly, and the following are my initial thoughts.

1. Very much classical style, and quite refreshing to hear something in that style again.

2. Check your engraving. Over the entire score, you have rests with dynamic markings.

3. Page layout can be bigger or staves made smaller. At least 4 measures per page.

4. There is key information missing from the score. If anything, the number of instruments as well as copyright information. You just say "Flute, Oboe, Clarinet," however, do you intend for more than 1 player for this part?

5. Between the two movements, in Musescore, you can add a "SYSTEM BREAK" which will end the piece and add a pause after a double bar line. On the next page, it will list the full instrument parts again. (in the layout palette)
   

With the literal music, there is more play you can do with the structure or in your accompaniment parts I think. 5-minutes for a classical symphony is on the shorter side and you can mess with the idea of a repeat after the exposition and utilize a 1st and 2nd ending to propel yourself into the development. It's not a "double exposition" per-say, however very common for the music of the time.

6 hours ago, MK_Piano said:

Hello! I have completed a first listen and looked over the score. I hope to do a deeper dive and analyze the score thoroughly, and the following are my initial thoughts.

1. Very much classical style, and quite refreshing to hear something in that style again.

2. Check your engraving. Over the entire score, you have rests with dynamic markings.

3. Page layout can be bigger or staves made smaller. At least 4 measures per page.

4. There is key information missing from the score. If anything, the number of instruments as well as copyright information. You just say "Flute, Oboe, Clarinet," however, do you intend for more than 1 player for this part?

5. Between the two movements, in Musescore, you can add a "SYSTEM BREAK" which will end the piece and add a pause after a double bar line. On the next page, it will list the full instrument parts again. (in the layout palette)
   

With the literal music, there is more play you can do with the structure or in your accompaniment parts I think. 5-minutes for a classical symphony is on the shorter side and you can mess with the idea of a repeat after the exposition and utilize a 1st and 2nd ending to propel yourself into the development. It's not a "double exposition" per-say, however very common for the music of the time.

Thank you, Mason. I will amend the score layout this morning. I appreciate this will make it easier to scrutinize for those having a deep dive. The current view and lack of repeats is intention for my own eyes and there is often no point having repeats during this phase of work. But yet, with the repeats the first movement will be at least 10 minutes once I am done with it.

You seem to be a guy who knows his stuff. Very much looking forward to your comments. Will check out your stuff too!

Edited 1 hour ago1 hr by Markus Boyd
🫣

4 minutes ago, Markus Boyd said:

Thank you, Mark.

I think his name is actually Mason..🤣