Violin Concerto - first movement.

Grande concerto sinfonico per violino in D minor.

First movement - Allegro con brio

Instrumentation:

1 Fl.

2 Ob.

2 Cl.

2 Bsn.

2 Hrn.

2 Tpt.

2 Trb.

Timpani in D.A.

Solo Violin.

Strings.

Dedication: Tom

Grande concerto sinfonico per violino s2.sib

Grande concerto sinfonico per violino.mid

C.pdf

I must say, I loved this piece, though there's not much I can really review about it other than that.

The one thing I can say is... are those very high violin parts possible? Just browsing through it, I notice a few places where you use a D7 (assuming middle C is C4), and one place where you use an E7 (measure 286). If they are possible, they've got to be really difficult. Of course, you yourself did say how much you loved virtuosity, and I must agree, that is a preference of mine.

I think it's a very well-written, well-orchestrated piece, and I hope that the rest of the movements go well.

Well thank-you ;)

Although you say, "Of course, you yourself did say how much you loved virtuosity, and I must agree, that is a preference of mine."

I mentioned how I do not love virtuosity.

However those high notes are definitely possible. You will find the like of them even in Mozart.

Thanks for listening :)

Hi, I cant comment too much as my sibelius is refusing to playback so I cant actually hear what you have written but I have played some of it at my piano. It looks like a good piece, but the harmony is too pastiche for my liking. Some of the violin figuration could have come from any number of concerti (and you use this figuration a lot in the piece) and so although I think its a worth attempt at a concerto, I get the sense that it is too stuck in the 19th century tradition and you are attempting to write virtuoso music for the sakes of it in places. Some passages your soloist will find difficult just because of the way the part moves around and the high notes, although possible, are always stuck there for long periods, particularly in rapid arpeggio patterns. I havn't looked at all your stopping, I presume you are familiar with this, but one caught my eye as being unplayable. Bar 60 you have F, A , D. The F would have to be played on the D string, The A could be taken on the A string which leaves the D which cant be played on the E string, so would make it difficult. If you revoiced in going up D, A, F then the D can go on the G string, A on A string and F on E string. You may find that you encounter this problem throughout so always check the playability of your writing.

Also, visually, it is best to separate your solo violin from the string ensemble as it makes it look like a solo part whereas in your score it looks like it is part of the ensemble.

Obviously I couldn't hear it all, so please don't be offended, but I can see that it is modeled on the 19th century concerto, I would like to see some more originality, and more varied string writing.

All the best!

Thanks for the review, Hymnspace. You are right about it being modelled roughly on early 19th century practises. I am taking a totally different direction in some of my newer things, and I appreciate where you are coming from.

As to that triple stop, yes, I am familiar with the technique, and I don't think you will find them to be so awkward throughout the piece.

That one is difficult, and would have to be played with the F on the 4th string, the A on the 3rd, and the D on the 2nd.

However, I would probably prefer that those chords be played divisi. I have not specified, because it is entirely up to whoever would hypothetically be conducting the piece.

Thanks for the idea about separating the solo violin from the strings. I will do that.

Thanks for taking the time to listen, and comment; I appreciate it!

That was quite nice. My only question is why did you write a minor second in measures 475-476? To me, it was out of place.

And from a violinist's stand point, at times, especially early on in the piece, I thought that the orchestra, overpowered the violin. Now I know it was only the midi, and instrumentalists are much more controllable, but in a live performance the orchestra would overpower the violin in much of the first of it, the second half was a nice. I was actually listening to it and looking at the score, and I thought wow, this would be fun to play.

Interesting and very very long 2 minute orchestra intro. I do like the piece in fact. It's indeed very classical-ish, truly reminds me of Beethoven and the other great composers of the era, great work, I have nothing much to say, but I will leave you at this. Keep up the good work. :toothygrin:

-Cheers

Hey, your welcome Daniel. One point I think is worth raising, you said you would leave it up to whoever conducted the work to decide about divisi?

I strongly recommend that everything in your score reflect what you want out of the performance. A conductor is not there to make judgments about the notes themselves, only the interpretation of the notes.

All the best

Space

Sorry about that virtuosity thing... evidently I can't read... When I meant virtuosity, I meant a balance between actual musicality and virtuosity, not just bland show.

Ok, first off I'd like to say that the opening was very well done IMO

I must say that your use of the orchestra IMO was well done. Although at times you seemed a little overzealous with your strings, (not counting the solo violin :P) IMO you could have balanced out the strings against the woodwinds and brass a bit. The virtuosity of this piece is definitely a high point IMO although at times you seemed a bit zealous with your super high notes. other than that I like it, especially the orchestration at times, very nice there

Can't really say much more than that

Good Job!

im actually in no place to comment on your composition skills, but i mean as a top violinist, it doesnt seem very intresting to play, as a violinst we love to have space and if you listen to mendhelsson or tchkycovsky (misspelt) you have alot of runs and double stops, but there is no catchy tune, like there is hardly any memorable melodies the violinst can like rubarto alot, just seems as the violinst is doomed to black notes, but it its still very gud :evil: all im saying its not got any catchy tune, that wud make me remmeber it

Is this piece just utterly scraggy? Should I just take it offline?

Is this piece just utterly scraggy? Should I just take it offline?

um............. no....? Maybe people have just not have not had time to review lately. I would have reviewed it sooner, but I didn't have time to give something other than "oh I like it and it's really great". so yeah, don't worry, other people will review it. :) Now, to start reviewing....

Wow. This is really amazing work, Daniel. A little farther through the classical and romantic periods than the Spring Overture, but still amazing. I really like the beginning. It doesn't sound too good with Sibelius, but with a really oboe it would sound fantastic. The exposition sounds fine to me. It fits nicely and the harmonies you use are nice. LOVE the theme at mm45!!!!! It sounds really really cool. At mms72 and 74, I think it's a bit unreasonable to have the timpani going from ppp to ff in that short of time. I can barely hear it as it is. It sound be from at least a mf to a fortissimo.

Ah, now the violin comes in. Great entrance with the long note and sixteenths following. OMG I LOVE MM101. The theme with the trombones is PERFECT!!!! Such an awesome place to put that. :D Ok, nice parts with the violin and orchestra. Now comes measure 133. I think the grace notes in the winds sound a little strange. Maybe just have them playing the eight note without the grace?? 141 is really nice...... Nice conversation between the principle and orchestra.

The second theme sounds really nice in major at mm158, especially with the horn as the melody. Nothing else to comment on until 200. I feel that this is a really strange transition. Way to sudden to have everything moved up a half step. Maybe you should have a modulating bridge somewhere to... ease it up a bit. The rest of the key changes are almost flawless. Nice job on that. mm241 should be fun for the performer, shouldn't it? :) lol. The theme at mm258 is a little sudden. It doesn't really fit in with everything thats going on at that moment. It's a nice theme though. It moves along very nicely with the violin and orchestra.

My next comment is about mm336. This part sounds really good with whats going on, and gives the violin some fun glissando stuff to do. mm363 sounds a bit strange. Again, it's the problem that it... just doens't sound... right. I think it's because of the E natural in the bassoon. It makes it sounds like Gypsy music, or Jewish music or something. For me, this would stand out too much. Maybe try having both bassoons play in the same octave (with the principle oboe as well) but have the F# D and D going to G C# and Eb? That's what I would do in that spot, but who knows....

From here on to the end is just a whirlwind of greatness. I love the ending as well. Heres some other small things that I wanted to point out to you: I think you should ease up on your use of grace notes. To me, the sort of ruin the whole note that comes after it. Some good examples of this are the clarinet in the beginning, the violin when it first enters, and especially at mm257. The beauty of this section is really ruined by the grace notes everywhere.

Well, great work Daniel. I look forward to hearing the other movements! :D

PS: The name is really awesome, too! Grande concerto sinfonico per violino. lol

Well thanks for that detailed review, William.

I don't think it's bad because of no reviews though, I think it's bad because it's weak in certain areas.

"The theme at mm258 is a little sudden. It doesn't really fit in with everything thats going on at that moment."

I agree with you about this. I may eventually try to fix that section.

"it... just doens't sound... right. I think it's because of the E natural in the bassoon."

While I again agree that this section needs work, the Eb you suggest wouldn't work - it has to be an E for the trills to work.

Thanks for taking the time to listen, and review. I appreciate it.

Greetings Daniel!

In answer to your question, you definitely should not take this piece down. Just because you aren't as popular as some here by no means reflects on your talent. Talent and popularity often have nothing to do with one another.

I enjoyed listening to this work, and I think you have succeeded in created a Classical style Symphonic Concertante for Violin, as I have heard this particular genre called.

What you did right:

Your themes are all quite suited to their tasks, and you employ them with firm assurance. You manage to include enough harmonic twists in your development of these themes that they always seem fresh and interesting. At no point did I say, 'Oh, there's that theme again. Was interesting the first dozen times, but...' That didn't happen. I was interested the whole way through.

Your harmonic language, though Classical, which is not always to my taste, was quite good. You managed to include enough key changes in your Development to completely eradicate a sense of home tonality, so that when you return to it in the Recapitulation, we feel a sense of relief to finally find our way back home. Further, all of your key changes came in completely rational ways, none of them seemed out of place, nor were they predictable. Plus, those little diminished chords you tossed in from time to time really spiced up the sound palette. :)

Your use of the Solo Violin looked good to me. I am not a Violin player, so I don't know all the details, but what I saw looked very reasonable. The Soloist has enough interesting material to keep him occupied, but at the same time, he won't steal the show.

Your form was well designed and craftily executed. I think you have the feel for Sonata-allegro form. :laugh:

What I think you can improve:

Until we reach measure ~150 , the piece seems to have all of one emotional feel to it. Sort of a melancholy, with brief moments of excitement thrown in. There's no relief from it, not even a hint of respite, until we reach measure ~150 where you switch to a Major key theme that is gentler and reassuring. I think that you ought to vary your emotional language throughout the piece more, give it better balance. Consider Beethoven's 5th. The first movement is full of excitement, but his second theme is still quite dulcet and powerful in its own way. That's the key to these Classical pieces, managing to create different atmospheres. So much of the Classical that is posted on here completely fails in that regard, and I would consider it junk.

This is not junk, as I said. I just think you can still improve here!

So that's my review. Overall I think you have a good work, and I think it is fairly strong. Certainly stronger than many of the pieces that find their way onto this board. Do no fret if you are not getting the adulation that the more popular folks are getting. Your work holds value regardless how many fawn over it.

Matusleo

Hi,

this is quite a pleasant piece - including beautiful and moving themes e.g. the one starting in about measure 45 - but there are a few things still to improve:

1. The solo part is very weak and nothing challenging to play. Some fast appeggios which seem to have been written to challenge the violonist, but they are not what a violin player wants to play. Violinboy already said that

2. There are not enough contrasts in my opinion. This is because the meter always keeps pretty much the same. The piece is flowing and flowing but never comes to a break.

3. There are quite long passages which the same color. You could improve your orchestration. Don't use about 20 measures or whatever only strings. Try to, for example, add a bassoon or horn playing pedal notes (hope it's called like that in English) after a while (maybe after 4 measures strings only) to slightly variate the color and keep the piece more interesting.

Overall, the concerto is really beautiful. You should just improve your technical skills, e.g. writing proper parts for different instruments.

Greetings

ralph

exelent counterpoint. Classicaly well constructed.

fascinated by your expression. The entrance of your violin section is super.

the pianos and fortes are just excuisite. You did an excelent job. Though it is classicaly written it resembles a little modernism.

The transitions to happy are great . and your recapitulation well done.

but it needs to flow well back to the minor key which you did well.

im sorry my freind if you find the comments by me or other people a little bit harsh. We all know how much time and effort is put into each bar and we are not dismissing your work by no means. What is being said is improvements or personal takings to your music. possibley mine were slightly harsh due to me listening to the Mendhelsson violin Eminor just before hearing yours so :P. dont get disheartend and carry on composing this is really good and honestly we are just trying to help.

very much liked your violin concerto, I think you handle the development section very well. Although yes it does sound like like it was written early 19th century style but I like that so kudos to u !

Thanks, I appreciate it. :thumbsup:

im sorry my freind if you find the comments by me or other people a little bit harsh. We all know how much time and effort is put into each bar and we are not dismissing your work by no means. What is being said is improvements or personal takings to your music. possibley mine were slightly harsh due to me listening to the Mendhelsson violin Eminor just before hearing yours so :). dont get disheartend and carry on composing this is really good and honestly we are just trying to help.

moreover it is well known that the creator of the violin concerto of Brahms revised deeply the score because he thought the solo part was a bit weak....

good job anyway

Yes, I realise that some of the passage-work in this does not especially well fit the fingers of the violinist, but I will improve with experience.

I like this piece more now than when I wrote it... it's growing on me :)

But I understand where it is weak.

Hey! This is a great piece. My one problem with it is a bit related to something Matusleo said (about the first part having one emotional character). During the entire orchestral introduction, you hug very close to D minor, which seemed a bit confined to me. When the violin came in, and especially in the development, recap and coda, you allow your harmonies to go all over the place, and it really kept me on the edge of my seat. I know that you want to be in D minor by the end of the intro, but I think that if you allowed yourself a bit more harmonic freedom in the intro, it would be just as striking as the rest of the movement and you would have a very powerful, direct, homogenous piece of music. Sounds great!

Oh dear, I meant to reply to this ages ago.

Yes, I do stay close to D minor during the exposition, and perhaps too close.. but the reason for it is that when the soloist comes in, we can start exploring these other territories. I don't especially want the orchestra to have gone on a wide-ranging journey before the violin enters, and the dialogue, or story really begins in earnest.

I maybe did stay in D minor too much though, yes.

Anyway, thanks for the comments!

This is at least the 2nd or 3rd time I've listened to this all the way through.

This time with the score. I like it.

Comments, while listening:

It was interesting... roughly around m121, I was getting a little bored, and waiting for a change... and it happened at 129. Good timing, from a listener's perspective.

207-212 was cool. I would have liked to hear more of that before going back into the 8th note rhythm.

At 251 it felt like it was dragging a bit. The change at ~258 was also timed well... but this didn't seem to be as "interesting" as the change before. Almost... cliche (?) classical right there. (I.e., I'd have switched stations if it were on the radio if I came in right there.)

At 325, I don't think the 3rd note on the trumpets was needed... it felt extra/unnecessary.

The rhythmic spanish-like clarinet to trumpet part at 359 was nice, but I actually don't care much for the arpeggios that start at 367. I don't think you left enough of a "breath" from the rest of the piece, and while bringing in the same harmony is ok, I don't care much for those arpeggios. I think expanding on the trill motif with a slower, hm, background, would work better here. Perhaps just cycling through the wind instruments with that motif, and not having the violin arpeggios at all, up until 373.

402 is a nice relief after you built the tension, but I wasn't "ready" for the silence at 406.

I did like the violin arpeggiating when it came in at 434. I also really liked the way the piece started feeling at 446. It had a nice complete... "finality, heading toward the ending and resolving the remaining threads of ideas" feel, but still in that "hm, I don't know whether it's going to end from here, or whether it's a false ending. (I like that feeling... the "I'll probably be surprised around the next bend" one.)

479-483 felt a bit too sparse... it was kind of abrupt.

Ok, done listening with the score.

Overall, I really liked it. I (personally) would like it better if you cut back on the arpeggiating of the first violin, or at least add more rhythmic variation to it. I think that was what led to the "dragging" feeling.

I also think you should expand on the parts I mentioned above. It's feels like "here's an original idea that I want to explore... but uh oh, form dictates I have to come back to my original thought." I personally would prefer it if you were a bit more adventurous...

Just because I commented on the parts I didn't like... it doesn't mean that the rest of it wasn't excellent. (I.e., "the rest of it was excellent", after negating the negative.)

I'm not a composer, as I think you know. I'm also not much of a fan for most traditional forms, because they bore me in their predictability and tendency to force composers to a limited range of ideas. Basically, after you hear the first 1/3rd of a piece, you can switch stations, because there's not really going to be anything new.

Mahler, for the most part, isn't like that (although he actually jumps around a bit more than I'd like.) That's why I like listening to him, and also why Mozart's Fantasia in D is one of the few pieces I really like of his. (And, incidentally, why I don't like playing or listening to most of the rest of his.)

I really like the parts that you just teased me with, and I'd have liked to heard more along those lines.

Just my two cents... as a listener, not a "composer".