Donc, ce sera par un clair jour d'été

This piece was written for the 2026 Summer Competition.

It is technically past midnight on my side, I apologise as the audio took a while, hope this can still be reviewed.

Note:

I named this piece directly after the poem, maybe because it's the best name I could give it, actually. It's meant to directly translate the poem into music, so I figured that would be apt for a piece such as this. It's written in a loose ternary form with a few motifs consistently coming back throughout. Each section (ABA) represents a stanza in the poem. The first section opens with a bright, jubilant depiction of a summer day, before transitioning to the beauty of the subject. Then, the middle section adds some turbulence to this nature of the love, a personal interpretation of mine on the poem. Finally, the return of the A theme is accompanied by fleeting runs like the evening wind, as the lovers gaze into the sky. Most of the rest I will leave to your interpretation of what is happening, but I do encourage physically reading the poem while listening to the piece.

As for the instrumentation, the French Horn is an instrument dear to me, despite having only picked it up for slightly less than three years. Through all the technical difficulties of this piece (yes, the Horn part is playable, albeit challenging), I wanted to showcase the mellow, melodic sound of the horn as something unique. The choice of the violin, then, was nothing special, another melodic instrument to complete the lovers' dialogue portrayed thoroughout the piece. The piano, then, allows for all the word painting possibilities.

It was quite a rushed piece, given my recent schedule, but I enjoyed the time spent just appreciating the loveliness of the poem. Enjoy listening!

Donc, ce sera par un clair jour d'été.pdf

Edited Thursday at 04:17 PM3 days by latebeethoven_addict

Hello @latebeethoven_addict,

congratulations for your submission just before the deadline – and, yes you’ve accomplished it in time!

Melodies Themes Motives and Harmony Chords Textures:

The piece is full of different themes of motives, some of them more „melodic“, while others seem to be a more virtuosic accopaniment. That strength is, in my opinion, also the weakness, since in the combination it results in a huge variety of the texture with a slightly tendency to „randomness“. With that in mind, the section between mm. 24 and 55 is the strongest part of the piece, for the memorable recurrence of the „sung“ melody.

Form Development Structure Time:

You mentioned, that the piece is in a („loose“) A-B-A form. I suppose, the boundaries of those three sections are at the moment of the key signature changes, at mm. 60 and 100. However, I must admit that I didn’t perceive the third section as a kind of „recapitulation“ of the first one, and even the three sections consist themselves of several passages with quite different textures. Overall, after listening three times, the form seems to me a more „free“ one.

Originality Creativity:

The piece is original and unique among the submissions for its instrumentation and perhaps for its „virtuosity“, especially in the harp-like piano runs.

Score Presentation:

The first thing I noticed was the order of the instruments in your score. In a trio with piano as the keyboard or continuo instrument, it would be placed at the bottom of the score, whereas the other instruments are ordered according to their register/pitch, meaning the violin on top and the French horn in the middle. Here is an example of a „traditional score“ of Brahms’ Horn Trio.

As another „nitpick“, there is a redundant key signature in mm. 95.

Instrumentation Orchestration Playability:

The choice of that particular three instruments gives the piece a variety of colors which I really liked (and which could not be achieved, for example, with a strings-only trio).

Concerning the playability, you mentioned yourself that the horn part is challenging. I think, this is the case for the piano part, too.

Execution of Given Challenge:

You have chosen the three stanzas of the poem and expressed their different moods, „the summer day“, „the nature of love“ and „the evening wind“, during the three sections (ABA) of the piece.

The „cantabile“ passage from mm. 24-55 could be interpreted as „the sung poem“, in a duet between the piano’s treble voice and the violin. Therefore, I can see a strong connection between your piece and the challenge of the contest.

Taste:

It is a pleasant piece to listen to, but unfortunately it does not captivate me all that much, perhaps due to the somewhat overboarding variety in texture.

Average Score: 7.75

hello, this is my review for your piece

it does sound very French, but not as much as the others, but it still has that Parisian vibe to it. Any ways I like the key changes that shows up near the end and the time signature changes much respect for that but the one thing that just bothers me is just that everything is using MuseScore basic so it wasn’t as much enjoyable as the other stuff that use muse sounds and other sound fonts if you have the time to you should definitely use muse. Sounds as it’s free.

technique wise, there is some French horn stuff that I was a little bit iffy on and nothing inherently wrong with the violin part. One thing I must say is that if you’re going to mark something pizz, it would feel better to leave that to ring rather than a staccato to note. The piano writing was really nice and I like the textures that show up.

other than that, I felt like there was some empty space that could be filled in the thing about that though is that I understand that you may put the purpose of a solo or isolation but something fell off when something was brought in isolation. Also, I felt like dynamics could also be brought out a bit more. just like with all the other pieces, the creativity score is being tanked a little bit due to the same aesthetic image that is convergently showing up.

average is 7.78

good job here. It was really nice to listen to. I feel like with some things to improve in practice. Will get you better. Hopefully, I’ll see you in the next competition.

4 minutes ago, Fruit hunter said:

hello, this is my review for your piece

it does sound very French, but not as much as the others, but it still has that Parisian vibe to it. Any ways I like the key changes that shows up near the end and the time signature changes much respect for that but the one thing that just bothers me is just that everything is using MuseScore basic so it wasn’t as much enjoyable as the other stuff that use muse sounds and other sound fonts if you have the time to you should definitely use muse. Sounds as it’s free.

technique wise, there is some French horn stuff that I was a little bit iffy on and nothing inherently wrong with the violin part. One thing I must say is that if you’re going to mark something pizz, it would feel better to leave that to ring rather than a staccato to note. The piano writing was really nice and I like the textures that show up.

other than that, I felt like there was some empty space that could be filled in the thing about that though is that I understand that you may put the purpose of a solo or isolation but something fell off when something was brought in isolation. Also, I felt like dynamics could also be brought out a bit more. just like with all the other pieces, the creativity score is being tanked a little bit due to the same aesthetic image that is convergently showing up.

MelodiesThemes Motives	Harmony Chords Textures	Form Development Structure Time	Originality Creativity	Score Presentation	Instrumentation Orchestration Playability	Execution of Given Challenge	Taste
7	7.75	7	6.95	7.5	7.5	9	7.5

average is 7.78

good job here. It was really nice to listen to. I feel like with some things to improve in practice. Will get you better. Hopefully, I’ll see you in the next competition.

Hi, thanks for the feedback! What do you mean by the French Horn part being iffy? Is it too hard? Because I do feel that a competent player could pull it off.

Thanks for the Muse sounds suggestion though, been putting it off for a while, but my playbacks do sound bad.

As for the empty space I really agree and I myself felt the same way, but I was also rushing other deadlines so I did the bare minimum I guess. Not the most proud of this piece honestly.

just the usage of the range of some stuff for the Frenchorn part and maybe some performance issues