Symphony No.2 in E minor (First Movement - Other movements coming soon)

Hello Young Composers!

It's been some time since I've posted a major work (that wasn't incidental), so I thought I'd start off today by posting my 2nd Symphony. I decided to start this project back in August when my school Symphony director was looking for a piece to play. I decided to start writing a symphony, and so this little baby came to be. This piece - first movement only :w00t: - will be performed at my school's (Cox High School) spring Symphony Orchestra concert. I will be conducting it too :D! Anyway, enough background, onto the piece itself:

First Let me start by saying that this is sort of untraditional - not in content, but rather structure. The first movement is in Sonata-Allegro form, of course, but it isn't the traditional Allegro movement one might see... the tempo marking is Adagio. It starts off with the basses in divisi playing a slow, simple, ascending motive - which repeats here and there throughout the piece (and into the latter movements). Once the basses do their thing, they are met by the cello and viola, and thats where the mood of the piece really starts to come out. Eventually, the first theme develops and then stops to make room for a brass chorale, which (in a sense) is a slight introduction to the second theme which is brought in by the Horns, Viola, and Cello. The second theme works itself around back to a similar motive stated in the first few bars of the symphony, only this time with a full orchestra. As that fades away, the development emerges with the flute and oboe, accompanied by pizz. strings. Soon after, the strings come back in with the horns at piano, and slowly build into the climax of the movement. There it is the trumpets boasting a theme while the violins play chromatic runs - Then back to the recapitulation (I like narrating music, apparently :P).

You'll notice an unorthadox ending for this movement - it doesn't end on the tonic. Instead it ends on the VII. This is because the entire symphony is attacca. The sustained chord at the end has no third because it SHOULD resolve to minor, but its deceptive in the fact that it ties over to the 2nd movement and becomes major (it'll make more sense once I finish and post the second movement, I swear!).

My plan for the symphony is:

I. Adagio

II. Largo sempre tranquillo

III. Moderato-Allegro

IV. Adagio-Allegro molto

I've already completed about 1/2 of the second movement, sketched the third, and I've gotten about 1/3 of the fourth written. I'll post them as I finish them up.

However, in the meantime, please enjoy this symphony. I know I've worked damned hard on it, and I hope you all enjoy it! :D

-mp3- (New Revised)

Thanks!

**Revised Score of 1st movement now posted***

love it, you really do wonders with GPO! can't wait for the rest of it!

Ever admiring, Mark

very nice thematic ideas, very cinematic. a lot of passion. despite it not being my style of music, I was quite engrossed by it all the way to the end.

scoring-wise, I think you need to re-examine the woodwinds. Their part is quite dull.

another thing with the woodwinds is you apparently only have 4 people playing. one flute, one oboe, one clarinet, one bassoon?

there is no way that will balance against 4 horns, 4 trumpets, timpani rolls and a string section. (one trombone? I didn't notice if there were more)

I think the woodwinds could use some more interesting figuration, like you gave to the strings. Your string writing is quite felicitous. Very nice effects, very successful break from the standard "sustained 4-part string harmony". It would be nice to feel that that extends to the equally agile woodwinds.

Mark -

Thanks for listening, I'm really glad you liked it!

QCC -

I completely agree with you about the winds. I definitely need to start considering them as a larger part of the piece, and give them more effective material. I'll start going through the whole piece tonight, and maybe before the weekend, I'll get up a score and recording of the new and improved winds :D! My friend who is a music major at JMU also suggested this, especially since it will actually be played - the balance must be there. I also will add another trombone - I originally had a euphonium, but once our orchestra lost the euph. player, I cut the line. I'll definitely bring that part back in as a second and third trombone.

Thanks for the nice comments and helpful suggestions. I'll put them into play (as I said above) and try and get a new score by the end of the week. :)

Evan, this piece is is wonderful :) I found it to be very passionate and moving, and I can't wait till the next movements. Good work!!!

Mattt

Evan, you made my day, that simple. Harmony to foam for. This is so gorgeous it's a crime :)

Hey buddy,

Well I just listened to it over a bit and here's what I think:

The movement is very pleasant to listen to and you had me laughing through most of it - the incidental music influence is now completely imprinted on your music! Mwahahahaha! The mood you set is professional and consistent.

Alright, enough praise for you; here come my real comments. The whole thing is a little TOO consistent for my taste...it never ventures far from your home key for very long and the pace and level of it feel too similar throughout the movement. Basically, while there IS development to the piece, it's organized in such a way that by the end of the movement, I don't feel a sense of completion that's as nice as I would have liked.

Your orchestration is traditional and well-executed for the most part. What I like are the brass leading solos; they really add to the atmosphere. What I don't like is a bit of a longer list. First off, I agree with Qccowboy that your woodwinds need to thicken up a bit and get creative. Ditto with your percussion section - have you learned nothing from me? :D ...:) seriously though, a little more percussion could really add some "oomph" to those climaxes and some REALLY nice accents in with the rest. For example, I could really hear a soft glockenspiel doing wonders in some sections - subtle but effective. And don't neglect the poor bassoon!

I've got one more comment, but this one's more just something to think about for the future: this movement is slow and moody, and your next one is marked as largo...so slow again. Just make sure that you keep the thematic material interesting enough to keep people hooked through two slow movements like that. Maybe even put the Andante-Allegro before it to space things out more evenly?

Anywho, I think that just about sums it up for my comments on this movement. Great work, nicely put-together.

Keep it up for the rest! ;)

:cool:

Evan,

This piece is beautiful! I don't really have any things to comment on and the comments that I do have are sort of "iffy" (they are based off of my opinion).

To start, at mm 19, you have the violas in the treble clef. While this is nice, you might want to think about actually putting the violas back into the alto clef and down on the G and C strings. I think that, because of the fact that you have only the strings, hrns, and some winds playing, this might add a bit of "fullness". I guess what I'm saying is that part is a climax, but because the E with the first violins and the violas high, it doesn't sound rich enough. Then again, this could be because of GPO, in which case I would be completly wrong. :)

A few more small things: How many woodwinds do you have? When I look at your score I see: 1 Flute, 1 Oboe, 1 Clarinet, and 2 Bassoons. That woodwind section is even smallish for Classical. lol. You might want to add another flute, AT LEAST another oboe, and another clarinet (and just tell next to it something like 'fl. 1' or 'fg. 2' to say who is playing and where). That could really make this sound fuller and make it... richer.

One last thing is that, along with Marius, I think that you should re-think your movement placement thing. This movement is slow and if this is all attacca, at least make a noticable change between mvmts. To me, this would just seem like a long piece, not a symphony. Look at Mahler's 1st. The 3rd and 4th mvmts are attacca, but there is a VERY big change between mvmts so you know the mvmt is over and another is beginning....... Just a thought ;)

Fantastic job here, Evan. I'm looking forward to the other mvmts. :D

William,

I disagree with your comment about the violas. I put them in that register to make the countermelody stick out even more. The fullness you hear is completely 100% intentional, and will stay the way it is written. Now, about the winds: Michel, Marius, Nico, Alex (not on YC), and others have all said this. I began rewriting the wind parts right after I read Michel's post. If you read through the thread, you'd see that I'm planning to post a revised score by the end of the week (I know how to indicate multiple instrument parts :innocent:).

Structurally - I've put the movements in the form they are in for a reason. I want the consistancy between the first and second movements being slow - I've even added an Andante into the third to make a smooth introduction into the third movement. Also, the purpose of the attacca is to string the piece along as one long, developing piece. So your thoughts on it being one long piece are exactly what I'm going for: great. There will be no breaks in between the movements. End of story. Though, I agree with making changes without stopping to indicate a new movement - That has been my plan from the get-go. This can be done with mood changes (as will be done in my piece) rather than solely using tempos to indicate a new movement.

Thank you for your comment on the Symphony, William!

Evan, I see no reason not to have two slow movements one after the other.

I rather like your projected structure, as long as it doesn't stay slow all the way through to the end (all though, there is precedant for this... didn't a Polish composer do symphony all in adagio movements?) and you develop your material well.

Michel -

Thanks! I maybe even insert a small Allegretto into the middle of the second movement, though, I haven't decided yet. I think that it would help lighten the mood up a bit. I don't plan on keeping the whole thing slow, though it would be really interesting to make a whole symphony that is slow! I don't think I've ever heard of the composer who did that, but I'll google it later and see if I can't find anything.

Thanks again.

Bravo!

I like this movement a lot. Your main gesture reminds me of themes from a big epic fantasy movie whose music I adore (the name of the movie shall here remain nameless to protect my reputation.*)

Anyway, I figure I'll make some large-scale comments first and then narrow it down a bit. I think the form of the piece is very well thought out, to start with. The final iteration of the main theme is very satisfying, because by that point the listener's ear is familiar with the harmonic progression and the melody. (By the way, when you go from E major to E minor, you should respell those A flats as G sharps.)

Marius commented earlier on how the overall consistency of the piece, while indicative of coherence and good musical thought, grows tiresome before the whole eight minutes of your piece roll out. I agree that one of the main reasons it seems this way is because of the fact that it never ventures harmonically very far from where it started. But I think there's an even deeper reason, and it has to do with harmonic rhythm. Almost without exception, throughout this movement your harmonic rhythm is the half note. That is to say, you change harmonies every two beats. After a while, the ear comes to expect the change.

The combined effect of these two types of consistency (harmonic and harmonic-rhythm) means that the ear knows both when the next thing is coming and what it is. Thus that delicate balance between the fulfillment and upsetting of expectations for which composers strive doesn't quite come through in this movement.

Moving on. In general, the way you've orchestrated your ideas in the string section is logical and musical, though I feel again that it is too consistent throughout. I feel that you could have made more use of the full sonority of the string section in the more climactic moments, and conversely more use of the thinner, more ethereal capabilities of strings in your softer sections. This is an issue of two parameters: range, and voicing. I feel you could have made better use of the latter in particular. Why not more double-stops, or big divisi chords to fill out the sound in the climactic moments? The French composers, as well as guys like Vaughan Williams, were really good at this, and I think you would do well to check out some of their scores. (Try Debussy's Iberia and Vaughan Williams' Fantasia on a Theme by Thomas Tallis for starters.)

Honing down even more, I would point out that there are a lot of places where your first trumpet part is just too damn high! Not that it's unplayable, but at that range I think it will cut through the orchestra much more than you'd want it it to. For this reason, I would suggest either rethinking the range, or perhaps letting a Piccolo Trumpet play the Trumpet 1 part.

At the third bar after letter E, you do this really cool gesture with your flute and clarinet. I think the reason that it's cool is because it's a new rhythmic force. I wanted to see you play around with that more, but I didn't see it come back.

Also, take a look at your viola part in bar 85. This syncopated filling-out of the chord is precisely the kind of orchestrational/textural development that this movement needs to make it even better. Why not let this bar be the start of something bigger -- something that maybe spreads to the cellos, and any other accompaniment instruments, as the melody continues on top?

These are the things that stuck out on my first couple of listenings. Let me know if you need me to clarify anything I've said. On the whole, this is a marvelous movement, and I can't wait to see the symphony in its complete incarnation!!

*Lord of the Rings. There. I said it.

Thanks, Michael, for your very helpful (and insightful) review. This really showed me some new possibilities with this movement.

Let me start off by touching on my notation of the E Major chord (used in this context) being spelled B, E, Ab. I did this moreso to keep a sort of chromatic consistancy in the melody. Rather than notating it G# -> G natural (which also looks more confusing), I chose to notate it Ab -> G natural.

Ok, onto the big stuff!

When you're are talking about the harmonic rhythm of this piece, I see exactly what you mean. I definitely see how this could contribute to some of the predictability of the movement of the piece. Thank you for pointing that out :P. I will definitely look into this as I further my revisions to this movement.

I also liked your suggestions about making the strings have larger chords for the more climactic areas of the piece. I will also look into this and make necessary revisions! hahaha

Onto the trumpet: I can see what you mean for mm50, possibly, but I purposely wrote the trumpet in this range (mm66) in order to do exactly what you said: cut through the orchestra. As you can tell, thats the huge climax of the movement, and I feel that the trumpet in it's upper range will give me the desired texture that I'm looking for.

About the beginning of the development at rehearsal E - I really enjoyed writing that part, and your comments have made me question my little use of it. Perhaps I'll bring it back throughout the piece in little snippets or countermelodies... I'm interested to see what I'll do with that :D.

In reference to mm85 - I think you've hit the nail on the head. I will get right on to making that a more important contrapuntal aspect of the symphony... that may even help clear up some of the predictability of the movement.

Once again, Michael, your critiques were very helpful, and I will take all of them into consideration while I revise this. Though, it seems you're going to set me back on getting my piece up by the end of the week :) (I have a church retreat from Saturday to Sunday)... Maybe I'll get it up by next Monday... hopefully. Anyway, it shouldn't be too long from now.

Also, just to give everyone an update on the 2nd movement: I got a lot more work done on this, so it may be finished within the next couple weeks... that'll depend on how much time I have to work on it though.

Anyway, thanks, everyone, for your nice comments so far :D

- Evan

My pleasure to help you out. It's especially satisfying to see that you spent time considering each of my comments. Best of luck as you continue to revise this movement, and with the rest of your movements. And remember, never do anything unless your musical instincts tell you it's the best thing to do!

Dang, just from looking at the score it looks amazing. Way to work!

Ok, everyone, I'm back! And this time, I've brought along a revised score :D. I took a lot of your suggestions and put them to work. You'll all note the thicker winds. I also changed a couple parts around, brought back a little bit of the developmental-motive that Michael was speaking of, and added some new things. Anyway, I've uploaded the new score and mp3 in this post, but I've also fixed everything in the original post as well. Please let me know what you all think of the updated version. :P

-mp3-

Thanks!

- Evan

Evan,

this is a MASSIVE improvement over the previous version, Bravo.

I have a few comments:

1. at E, I think it would work better if you divided your flutes and oboes (1st flute and 1st oboe in unison, 2nd flute and 2nd oboe in unison) rather than have that jump down in the oboe part

2. before J, it might work better to have the arpeggios in clarinet and flute rather than clarinet and oboe, with the sustained melody in the oboes (which are still quite pungant sounding)

3. at F the long unison of 2 clarinets, 2 bassoons, and horn might be overpowering

4. at D, why not have the oboes play a held note, divisi A and low C? it would give a sustained effect to the woodwinds, while allowing their timbre to be included before their entrance on the choral theme. (also, the flutes are in a very weak register there, the oboes would help bolster the sound)

Michel,

Thanks for the comments. Tomorrow (once I'm rid of my huge mass of homework sitting next to me), I'll whip out my score and see what I can do. Because this will be my first big performance of a piece, I want it to be perfect (or as close as I can get :)), so everything you guys are telling me is really helping.

Evan,

This is really an improvement from last time. Your woodwind section sounds much better now that you have added second wind parts to everything. :D I just have one thing to mention. At 3:30, I think tuba would add nicely to the offbeats. Just a thought. Other than that, I really love the way this symphony sounds. It will be amazing when it's performed! :D

Hey everyone, sorry that I haven't posted anything new. I have, however, been able to work a little bit on the 2nd movement of the symphony. It's much closer to being done, however, exams kinda took a huge chunk out of my composition time over the last 2 weeks or so. Anyways, just posting to let you all know that my normal composition time has resumed, and you should have the 2nd movement (hopefully) within a couple weeks. I've also decided to completely redo the fourth movement, so that will definitely be delayed longer. Work on the third movement is starting up again as well. I have the main themes outlined, so now its just about manipulating them into a chorent, symphonic movement!

Thanks!

-Duff

Dude!!!! All my friends go to your school...i'll def be there at the concert...

Hello

this piece sounds really good, it sounds like a combination of Beethoven and Howard Shore, but also sometimes has a touch of tchaikovsky's 4th. (the melodyline going lower)

sounds great !

Remco Denessen

ps: this is my first post. I am a total amateur on composing but will try to post something i have written soon

so passionate , so despress feeling

dark-cry

can i see your score ???

dark-greedy-cat