Charles Geday

Hi all, I recently finished putting together a paper on the interpretation of Beethoven. It raised some interesting questions. Any comments/criticisms, let me know! -Charles

Hi Henry, I will go back through the piece and try to fix the clashes then. I will rewrite the end of the movement to cadence in Bbmj then. I don't think I phrased myself in the best way, my apologies. I meant that I wanted to recreate the feeling of a fugue (with the example of Hammerklavier) without actually writing one because doing this fits with my musical language and ideology. -Charles

Hi @Henry Ng Tsz Kiu thank you very much for your detailed feedback! I know the writing here is not perfect, but a lot of the harmony is intentional and not simply a lack of practice/understanding. The orchestration/counterpoint/general writing for large ensembles I'll admit does need a lot of work, but that's why this is my Symphony No. 1 (I don't at all mean to sound hostile, I'm being serious). I am making changes based on your points as I type this. I am changing it to 'Danza' to fit with the programme whilst acknowledging the more throughcomposed structure and absence of a minuet tempo. Because I wanted a lighter, less full and imposing sound rather than only changing the dynamic marking. I'm not quite sure what it is myself, I just wrote it in Dmin but the Eb sounded more correct than the E so I guess it's in Dmin and Bbmj. There is a II-V-I cadence no? It's not intended to be an actual fugue and to follow the fugue rules. I wrote 'come une fuga' to make it clear that I wanted it in the style of a Hammerklavier-esque long, continuous almost death fugue. But I will try to resolve some of the clashes certainly. Thank you! -Charles

Apologies, I attached an ouutdated score and audio file. Here are the correct, up-to-date ones:

Hey everyone! Sorry I've been absent from these forums for a while focusing on school work and... writing a symphony! I started writing this work back in November 2022, beginning with the 3rd movement (the Adagio Molto), and have been toiling away at it ever since. The work is a semi-autobiographical programme symphony with great influence from the likes of Beethoven (daddy😏), Mahler and Berlioz. It tells the story of a Protagonist who travels to America from Europe, meets a young woman, falls in love, leaves America, becomes depressed, returns later in life and marries her. My favourite bit is the 3rd movement- the funeral march- because it is the most idiiomatic and most effectively communicates my message. Plus I spent almost all of my time on it. This symphony is close to being done, what I'm sharing is my third full draft. Some of the openings, transitions and endings still need to be reworked, and I'm sure there are plenty of notation errors that I've missed, as well as more articulation markings etc to add. I'd be grateful for any constructive criticism on the musical and non-musical side as this will form part of my portfolio for conservatoire application here in the UK. Also tell me what you like (if there is anything). I have attached the score in pdf, the sibelius sounds rendering in mp3 and a sample of the programme in pdf. I look forward to seeing what you have to say, and to review more work on these forums again myself! -Charles

I'd love to see/hear the revised version, of course! Also thanks for the recommendation- I'll be sure to check out Bowen! In fact, I'd like to make a recommendation Rach 1. The cadenza in the first movement is one of my favourite cadenzas of all time, when I listen to the Zimmerman/DG recording I wonder why I even bother playing piano at all lol.

First off, I must congratulate you. I can count on my hand the number of pieces that have made me actually cry and this is one of them, I was so moved by the musical journey that you took me on (which I'm sure has some extra-musical inspiration and that really came through in both the writing and your performance). I would not see this out of place among the most beautiful works such as (although they're concertos not solo works) Rach 2 2nd mvt, Shostakovich 2 2nd mvt, Beethoven 5 2nd movement and so on, which as I'm sure you can tell is definitely high praise. I salute you for your work, great job! So, my thoughts on this piece... The first theme and the quaver interjections complement each other well, and this fits in a Ballade if you were taking Chopin as your guide. You build up to the dramatic passage in bar 57 well, although personally I would have extended it to a 4-bar phrase as it's a 'lovely' contrast to the beautiful melodic writing at the beginning. That's just my thoughts though, feel free to disagree. The new meno mosso material at bar 75 is a nice contrast to what has come before but it still feels like part of the same piece, as is common in a Ballade which in literature is a sort of song-style poem made up of 'verses' and 'choruses'. I love your harmonic work throughout the entire piece, the addition of the extended harmonies in the more passionate moments really gives a lot of colour to the work. However, I'm not quite sure about the modulation and key change in bar 88, it doesn't sound like a natural relation even if it is theoretically sound (pun intended), but again just my thoughts. The modulation and key change in bar 124 works really well though. The marcato section in bar 146 reminds me of the grandioso from Liszt's Piano Sonata, but I think it deserves more development since it's such an impressive and grand moment, personally I think you move on from the material into the triplets too quickly. The recap of one of the themes (can't remember off the top of my head which number, sorry!) at the meno mosso in bar 157 is a nice addition to separate the ideas, again fitting into the Ballade general structure which I mentioned before. My only significant quarm with this piece is at bar 164 with the molto maestoso. It's almost frustrating because to me it sounds like it really wants to go into a furious Chopin-esque coda/cadenza but the writing holds it back and stunts it. Personally I would go straight into a coda/cadenza starting at bar 172, I think that would really put the icing on the cake if you had a monstrous section to rival Chopin's 1st and 4th Ballades after you've build up all the tension. I would urge you to listen to those two works and have a look at how the run up to and the codas/cadenzas themselves work as that is a key part of a typical Chopin Ballade, which it sounds to me like you are aiming to create your own take on. A small thing, but the gliss in bar 188 wasn't played in the recording- was this intentional? Ending on an Adagio is an interesting choice and not really consistent with a typical Ballade, although in the case of this piece specifically it actually works quite well. There is also no real definitive way to write a Ballade- for example there are a lot of differences between how Chopin and Bortkiewicz write one. The gemendissomamente marking at the end is not a common one but I suppose, because it is a very specific effect that you want to achieve, that it is necessary. Overall I absolutely adored this piece, for me it was very emotionally hard-hitting and the writing for piano was perfectly executed. In fact I love it so much that I would love the chance to play it in a concert, although it might take me a bit of time to learn. Again, congratulations- you have something really special here.

Count me in too!

Hi all, Here is the second work I am submitting to this forum- my Mini Piano Concerto No. 1. It's called a Mini Piano Concerto because it doesn't use a full orchestra but instead decently-sized sections of 5 string instruments First thing I have to say is that this is by no means the last complete version of this piece, there are some changes that I will continue to make, for example: Use combinations of bass clef and treble clef in the introduction of the exposition of the 1st movement and in the third theme of the second movement to make it easier to read Possibly rewrite the first theme of the exposition of the first movement (and its return) in 3/4 rather than 6/8 as it has been suggested to me recently. I disagree with that judgement personally, but I'd be interested in what you think. Some of the transitions need work. I say some because of the intended story of the piece which I will explain later. There are defeinitely a lot of notation errors (for example places where notes have flat and natural signs at once). Some of the thematic material might be developed more- here I'm thinking of the fragmented material in the first movement. Anyways, in short the idea behind this piece is a sort of 'tortured soul' kind of thing, with an idyllic, dreamy second movement (no concerto would be complete without one in my opinion). I should also point out that this was my first ensemble work, so I'm not proud of the orchestration at all. I have attached the mp3 file generated by Sibelius, the PDF score and a Commentary/Analysis document I wrote to give you some technical insight into the piece and to try to explain why I made the decisions that I did. (Yes the dates in the file titles are still the most recent even though they're from September, I haven't uploaded the wrong files). Good morning/afternoon/evening/night! P.S. I'm posting this at 3:25am so apologies if it's just one big rambling mess.

Its gotten to the point where I make that joke myself, that's how many times I've heard it. September was the start of my 12th year playing and my 6th year writing. I had not thought of that comparison, but yes I see what you mean! Thank you very much, very kind! The transition isn't played very well by the sibelius midi-mp3 render, in reality there would be more of a fermata-esque pause and it would be phrased better, but I can see what you mean with the recording I posted and the notation on the score I posted. Thank you again! I'll be posting my Mini Piano Concerto (perhaps along with some other shorter pieces) on Sunday. I look forward to my time on this forum. I know there is more I could've done with voicing in the right hand- I was more focused on the harmonic structure than the melodic one- but it's definitely something for me to pay more attention to with future works.

Sorry for another late reply (I really am getting good at those). I appreciate all the insight you've given, it has certainly given me some concepts to think about going forward. Speaking of which, I might post my piano concerto on these forums when it is finished this weekend so watch this space! Have a good weekend!

Sorry for the late reply... Thank you, it's encouraging to know that the music had its intended effect. It's interesting that you say this, I neither disagree nor agree with you. From my point of view as the composer, it was vaguely modelled on the break between the introduction to and the main theme of Chopin's 'Winter Wind' étude, giving the entry of the 'storm' of semiquavers with the heavy chords over the top a startling moment. From your feedback, I think your point is that it is too startling... is that correct? Again, I don't agree with you from my point of view as the composer, but I can't disagree with your interpretation and reaction- it is entirely valid and something for me to consider. I am indeed (been playing for 12 years now) and thank you for saying that, it is interesting because I am always being told I should write more practically/idiomatically as my music tends to be more about what 'sounds good' rather than what is actually practical and even possible (even though I should really be conscious of this as a pianist myself). I am going to have to disaree with you here. Personally I think the most dramatic register of the piano is the lower one- the Grave at the start of the exposition and of the development (the G minor chord) of the Pathétique sonata springs to mind where the low register makes the chords more heavy and appear to have a thicker texture even though voiced higher up they are the same. A follow-up question: why do you consider the middle register to be the most dramatic? I hope all that makes sense and I look forward to your reply!

Thank you very much, much appreciated!

Hi all, This is my first post on here, and the first time I have submitted a piece to the public, so no pressure. I wrote this piece for my GCSE (where it scored 24/35 for those who care, I definitely don't) but I hold it fondly in my mind. Anyways, here is a sort of brief/programme note: The title of the piece is meant to reflect the mutual exclusivity between the initial tonal sound and the steadily increasing level of dissonance and atonal sound. The A section sets out a steady pulsing rhythm allowing a complex chord sequence. The B section introduces a metrical uncertainty between ¾ and 4/4 while bringing in even more dissonance building up to a tonal climax before a return to the subject. This leads into the fast run section which ends in a dissonant chord and a much slower tempo. The ending resolves the tension built up from the B section… Or does it… Any criticism (or praise haha) would be much appreciated, enjoy!

Thanks! Glad you like it!