neuhausen

Don't forget Elgar's Second Symphony, another masterpiece! Carl Nielsen's Fourth and Fifth Symphonies also deserve attention, and if you like Sibelius, you should certainly check out the Symphonies of Arnold Bax (esp. Nos. 2, 5, & 6)

Hi everyone, I wrote a lyrical piece for trumpet and piano that may be suitable for this event. About the work: This piece was inspired by the popular vocalise by Rachmaninoff and its lyrical style, single prelude structure of Chopin, as well as static rhythmic and harmonic elements of the Baroque Adagio (second mvt of Marcello's Oboe Concerto in D minor, for example). The result is this vocalise for trumpet and piano. Of course any comments are always welcome. Keep the pieces coming! -Mike Vocalise for trumpet.m4a - File Shared from Box.net - Free Online File Storage Vocalise.pdf

Looks nice so far, just a couple comments that came to mind: 1: I really liked your look on the page with the fonts and presentation (obviously some overlaps needs to be polished for publication, but otherwise great look) 2: If I am not mistaken the Cornets appear before the Trumpets in score order. 3: The Tymp. rolls I do not think require a tie if they are notated as rolled (check on this) 4: I assume the whole score is in C and not yet transposed; therefore the First Trumpet Parts seem quite challenging (I hope they're good players), especially with the higher notes at the end. 5: Finally, as a Trumpet player myself, I have typically noticed that the Cornet parts (if there are also trumpet parts) are more active melodically than the Trumpet parts (which serve more a rhythmic function). In this regard, typically there are Cornets 1, 2 & 3 and Trumpets 1 & 2, the reverse of what you have here. I find it odd the Cornets do not play as much as the Trumpets. Remember, the Cornet has a slightly sweeter sound than the Trumpets and this is why traditionally it has been used more as a melodic instrument. Will these players actually use Cornets or will they—as is commonly done—simply use trumpets regardless? Anyway, hope my comments help. Good Luck with it!

Wow, what a coincidence :) You'll have to give us more of your impressions after study then. They would be most welcome! I have come to this symphony after learning his Second, Third, and Fourth and I have to say that of the ones I've heard, this has been my favorite. It truly is an excellent work. You should read my posting on the Bax symphonies too. They present an interesting alternative of handling of the symphonic problem and make for fascinating study as well! Keep us posted on your thoughts!

Another neglected symphonist whose nine symphonies await discovery for those patient and persistent ears is Ralph Vaughan Williams. His Fifth Symphony in D Major (1943—dedicated to Jean Sibelius, as is Bax's Fifth Symphony) is in four movements: I. Preludio: Moderato II. Scherzo: Presto III. Romanza: Lento IV. Passacaglia: Moderato Some of the principal ideas of the work, especially in the third movement, were generated for his opera The Pilgrim’s Progress. What is remarkable about this symphony is that is it quite modern, yet not in an extrovert way like Stravinsky or Bart

A good general recording of all seven symphonies is Vernon Handley's Boxed set on the Chandos label. You can find this on itunes or at amazon.

Since I have noticed the interest in Sibelius and his symphonies, I thought I would recommend another fine symphonist, Sir Arnold Bax (1883–1953). Like Sibelius, Bax composed seven symphonies and strove toward formal concision and unity in his works. It may be one of the tightest symphonic cycles of the twentieth century. The seven symphonies were composed over the course of 20 years and the cycle is unique in that the musical drama of one work, though complete in and of itself, demands resolution in the next. Thus Bax takes one step further the formal concision developed by Sibelius. I have included an essay I have written about Bax's First Symphony (1922) in order to introduce others who may not be familiar with this unique music, which is romantic yet entirely innovative at the same time. The entire cycle is certainly worth getting to know and I hope that discovery of this First Symphony will motivate others to explore the rest! Symphony No. 1 in E-flat, P. 256, dedicated to John Ireland, is scored for 1 piccolo doubling flute, 3 other flutes, 1 bass flute, 2 oboes, 1 English horn, 3 clarinets, 1 bass clarinet, 2 bassoons, 1 contrabassoon, 4 horns, 3 trumpets, 3 trombones, 1 tuba, timpani, bass drum, tenor drum, snare drum, tambourine, cymbals, gong, triangle, bells, xylophone, glockenspiel, celesta, 2 harps, and strings. The London Symphony Orchestra under conductor Albert Coates gave the premi

The Seventh truly is a great work to get to know. For those that enjoy the Finale of the Fifth Symphony, perhaps more remarkable is the first movement of that work, one of the composer's great formal experiments. The Fifth was one of Sibelius' most difficult works to write. There are three versions of the piece and at first it was a symphony in four movements. However, Sibelius as a symphonist experiments with form and particularly formal concision. The first two movement of the Fifth combine into one larger movement, wherein the scherzo and the first movement are combined. You can listen to recordings of the earlier version and then the final version to appreciate this extraordinary development. There is a lot more to say about this work, and maybe I will comment on it further if there's interest. About the other symphonies briefly: First Symphony, mvt III. Interesting how the trio interrupts the sonata form scherzo mvt during the course of the development section, then after the trio the scherzo returns in recapitulated form--> his first major formal experiment Second Symphony, mvt, III-IV. Note how the third mvt leads directly into the Finale. Not a unique formal development, but shows the composer's trend to strive toward linking mvts. Third Symphony, perhaps his most "classical" the first three mvt symphony. The Scherzo and Finale are combined in the Third mvt, and the memorable theme of the Finale gradually emerges from the motivic material of the Scherzo (along with some motives of the other mvts.) For this reason, many consider the Third to be his first "mature" symphony and real experiment with formal unity and concision. Fourth Symphony, his darkest work, notice how mvts, one and two and mvts, three and four are linked, making this a work almost in Two parts. This unity is especially apparant at the end of the respective movements. Fifth Symphony, aside from the popular "Swan-themed" Finale, the most remarkable aspects lie in the monumental first movement. Excellent use of wind writing (the first movement exhibits a "double" exposition wherein the first exposition is entirely presented by the winds (E-flat Major)! Then the strings enter (in G major) for the second exposition before the development ensues. Overall the work is great for studying the use of divided string sections and string textures (for which Sibelius was a master). Also, the effective use of pizz. strings almost entirely throughout the movement in the middle mvts of the Third and Fifth Symphonies should also be noted. The Sixth: D dorian, is a special work as well. very fragmented in nature and suggests a larger continuity throughout the work, which would later be realized in the Seventh. Of note here is the use of instrumental choirs with certain key areas. C major for the brass, D minor/dorian in the strings. Also compare the use of harp in this symphony (much more reserved and well thought out) with the use of the harp in the First symphony (much more lush and overty writing). The Seventh, we already have wonderful commentary about. Of course Liszt achieves a single-movement masterpiece with his Sonata in B minor, but the Sibelius does so on another level in that it can be said to integrate all aspects of a traditional symphony in one unified whole (scherzo, rondo, sonata-like development, slow movement, Finale). One thing I find so interesting about this work, is how the theme from the Violin Concerto, second mvt, is present in the Seventh Symphony after the great statements of the trombone theme quoted above! It is the theme on the long whole notes with the falling fourths. Eighth Symphony: There was much talk of an Eighth Symphony of Sibelius. In fact, the first movement was complete and scored, sent to the publisher to await the rest of the symphony (it was in four movements). The rest of the work was finished as well. However, in the 1930s Sibelius enjoyed being the most popular composer according to a NY survey and his increasing self-criticism led him to destroy this final symphony. Some consider him to have written two more symphonies: The Four Legends being one, and the Kullervo, his choral symphony. At any rate, Sibelius is one of the most accomplished of the 20th century symphonists and all his symphonies merit close study! He is a master of the orchestra (it was said he created the sustain pedal in his orchestrations) and his achievement in his use of formal concision at a time when mammoth orchestral works were being written is remarkable.

Thanks for taking the time to comment guys! It really helps me to get a fresh perspective on this piece because we each hear music in our own unique ways. About the ornaments, I think they seem a bit overburdened in the midi rendition; when I play them on my trumpet I don't think they obstruct so much, they somewhat flow rather freely from the instrument. I simply tried to embellish the line a little so that the piece may be musical but a bit virtuosic at the same time. About m. 16; I purposely held back here a little bit in order to make the motion into m. 19 more of a climax. I was trying to construct a series of smaller climaxes that would gradually build into the big moment of the piece, which Tumababa pointed out in m. 30. At m. 30, I do like my VI chord with a dissonant 7, but I completely agree that it sucks to have the piano get softer into that measure. Surely I need to have the piano crescendo into it, as does the trumpet. I hope this solves the problem you had with it. I was also curious about the ending, does it seem too stale with the eighth notes after all the activity of the middle section? I almost feel like we need a quieter, unwinding section of some length in the piano to balance the prior activity. What do you think?

This is a composition for trumpet and piano with many influences, both stylisitic and formal. Conceptually the piece obviously recalls Rachmaninoff's work by the same title for cello and piano, the lyrical character and steady accompanyment of which I wished to emulate. Stylistically I had in mind the Marcello Oboe concerto in C minor second movement, which is beautifully rendered on trumpet (Maurice Andr Vocalise for trumpet.pdf Vocalise for trumpet.mus

After reading the manual, I still have some general questions about working with GPO, or any other advanced soundfont library for that matter, in Finale. My first question is how much tweaking actually needs to be done in order to make for a realistic performance? If my understanding is correct, the more you meticulously prepare your score in Finale with articulations, slurring, dynamics, etc, human playback with automatically work with GPO to render a realistic sounding performance. However, I do not find the end result that convincing. Actually I find human playback in Finale 2005 to be more satisfying, which means I must be doing something wrong somewhere. My next question concerns the different patch samples: How can you move from one GPO patch to another? Tremelos and other things were easier to have executed in earlier versions of Finale it seems. I have noticed that in some libraries (Eastwest or maybe the full set of GPO), that there are different patches depending on the dynamic level, type of attack, playing style, etc). Do you have to select and move between these patches yourself or does human playback automatically do that for you? How is this best done? What does KS mean in the string samples (ie. violin KS)? Finally, How does reverb work in the master selector in mixer? Whenever I try to tinker with the reverb in the master in the mixer, nothing happens. Also, as I try to sustain the note lengths in kontakt (as I'm editing an instrument), it doesn't seem to be transfered to actual performance. Are these settings saved just for the current composition, or are they applied to the master samples? I would appreciate any insight any of our experienced users could offer. I just find it disappointing how my woodwind piece sounds better in Finale2005 with the usual soundfonts as opposed to using GPO in Finale 2007. Maybe it would be of interest to have a subforum on using advanced soundfonts with notation programs. That way everything related to this topic could be in one location. I tried to find past postings on this site concerning GPO and Finale, etc, but often they were scattered around the site and not that easy to find. There could be treads about using GPO with Finale, another one with GPO and Sibelius, one for Eastwest, etc. Just an idea. Thanks for your help!

I may be wrong, but I'd try a "patch change" with your solo expression, which would upload the new solo sample.

Where is the best place to purchase these samples? It is cheapest to go directly through Eastwest's website, or are there other options that offer discounts, etc? I noticed that Finale users get a discount on GPO software. Is the same true for other samples?

That's a great site. Do you know of any other free online ones? Perhaps ones that can test more for inversions. I also liked the note naming exercises. Any with melodic/harmonic dictation? Thanks again for this suggestion!

Hello, Just a simple post to get opinions on the highest quality ear-training software available. Does anyone know of some that are effective, advanced enough (with complicated melodic and harmonic dications, 7th, 9th chords, etc, counterpoint) and reasonable priced? I would appreciate any suggestions, especially since we have a lot of music students who must use some of these programs at school. Any that should be avoided? Thanks