Vogel

Very good! I appreciate the attention to the engraving detail, which for me is always a promising sign. I agree with chopin, though, that the audio playback is weak. You could either spend time fine-tuning the mixing, or just downgrade to basic midi sounds, which would probably solve the problem. Personally, I prefer midi to fancy sound libraries, but that's just me. A couple notes: p. 28 / final chord: That low A in the second bassoon is going to sound a little muddy. It's not lower than the double basses, so we still have a root-position chord, but I'd much prefer a unison D with the first bassoon. It's just a cleaner sound. Oh, and some people might take issue with the voice-leading in the second trumpet here (it resolves from A to F# while other instruments resolve from G to F#), but this is not uncommon in orchestral music and the second trumpet isn't playing the soprano or the bass, so it should be fine. p. 85 / final two chords: Generally good voicing with all the chord-tones being filled in in the upper registers and the horns stepping in just below the woodwinds. But I would have the second trombone provide the root of the final chord if it were me, otherwise the brass are playing a second inversion chord in the final bar. If you really want the Ab there, then I would have the first bassoon play it. That way, both the woodwind and brass sections have complete Db major chords with the root in the bass. There's nothing technically "wrong" with giving the brass section a 6/4 chord (this is a symphony, after all, and other instruments are there to play the root of the chord), but if you look at it from the brass section's point of view, the brass players are going to notice the missing root and find it odd, especially when they play this chord in a sectional and don't hear the other instruments. These are very nitpicky details, though, and they don't detract from what is overall a very fine piece. Good work!

I started taking notes as I was listening but stopped midway through because the musical references were starting to bother me and I couldn't go on. Here are my original (rough and unpolished) notes: First Movement p. 14, 6/4 should be 3/2 p. 20, use two voices for flute and bassoon staves p. ?, this is almost note-for-note one of the themes from Franck's symphony Throughout the movement, trombones and trumpets are a little heavy - consider marking them down in dynamics (poco forte, for example, in a forte section, or just mezzoforte) pp. 23-24, the double stops are excessively difficult "arco" and "pizz." usually aren't italicized (some publishers do italicize them, though) You use a lot of mezzopiano, which is very uncommon in the music I listen to. Second Movement p. 1 - The "Affettuoso" section sounds suspiciously like the theme from Jurassic Park. p. 6 - This sounds like a deliberate quote from the third movement of Elgar 1. p. 9 - The "A dark path" section sounds like a famous pop song, but I don't know the name of it. p. 11 - This is literally the andante from Schubert 2. I had to stop a couple minutes into the third movement, because the musical references just got to be too much, and it was actually starting to make me mad. It was like listening to a medley of classical hits with none of the original composers credited (there were a lot more examples than the ones I listed here). Sorry if I'm being excessively harsh, but there are really only two possible explanations for what's going on here: either you're incredibly susceptible to unconscious plagiarism or... well... do I even need to finish this sentence? You obviously have some talent -- your sense of form, orchestration, and engraving are above-average -- but you can't get by on cribbing other people's work, whether it's conscious or not. If you want to emulate other composers, that's one thing (in fact, I encourage emulation as a valuable learning tool), but even emulation requires some degree of originality. Again, I don't mean to be harsh, but I think you can do better.

For what it's worth, I think "Sinfonietta" is a perfectly fine title for this piece. Before listening, the first thing I thought of was the Janacek Sinfonietta, which is anything but light in nature.

Very nice, gmm! But I think the Pesante section on p. 28 is too similar to the Pesante in Respighi's Roman Festivals (p. 10 of the full score). I assume that was the inspiration for this passage.

It's unusual to have all the voices playing all the time in a fugue. Even in a 4-voice fugue, you'll have moments where it's just S+T or A+B, or three voices at once. At the very least, there should be a rest every now and then. Otherwise, it gets exhausting to have all the voices hammering away non-stop.

Very nice! This is a lovely piece with plenty of inherent drama and melody to interest the performer. A few notes: The low C in m. 9 is a little inhospitable to tenors. It's usually their lowest note and, as such, very difficult to project. When composers write it (if they write it at all), they usually clear away the accompaniment to ensure that the note is audible (see, for example, Riccardo's canzone in Un Ballo in Maschera). Of course, this is a song for "high voice," not necessarily tenor, so it's less of an issue. And some tenors have a perfectly audible low C anyway. But like an exceptionally high note, it does limit the number of people who can sing this. The climax leading up to m. 38 is quite effective, heightened by the many suspensions. But in m. 38, to get the full effect of the cadence, I think I would prefer to remain on C-minor for the first two beats of the measure rather than raising the third on the second beat. The mood changes a little too rapidly for my tastes. In m. 52, I would maintain the triplet rhythm throughout the whole bar (at least in the RH). The shift back into duple time sounds too abrupt coming in the middle of the measure, as it does. That's all. Thanks for sharing!

I was led to believe the same thing. Well, "led to believe" might be a bit of an overstatement, as I never actually believed it myself. But I had to accept that all the people in charge of the musical establishment believed it, so I had no choice but to go along with it to some extent. But I spent a lot of my time in college/conservatory supplementing my learning in the library and the practice room, because what they teach you in school these days doesn't amount to much. Admittedly, I do shudder a little when typing things like "traditional sonata form," because I know that the "tradition" is an invention of later theorists, and many pieces of the period don't actually conform to the models. But it's fun to approach pieces with the models in mind if those models seem to have informed the creative process, as in this case. Ah, that makes sense. I was interpreting the Ab minor theme as the beginning of the development, but it does make more sense as the second theme of the exposition, since it returns in the recapitulation in the tonic. And I can see the similarity to K. 304 now that you point it out. It's interesting how Mozart turns the whole process on its head by ending the exposition with Themes 1A and B in the key of the relative major, which is sort of the inverse of what's "supposed" to happen in the recapitulation. You do something similar in your sonata, beginning the development with a statement of 1A in the key of Ab minor (the key of the second theme), but with the harmonic instability that follows, the effect is markedly different. I think this, plus the abrupt return to F major at m. 118, is what really makes it work. By the time we realize we're in the recap, it's already half over. There's a sense of continuous development as well as a sense of something familiar from the development until the end of the movement. I haven't read it, but I've read other books by these authors (Darcy's study of Das Rheingold is quite illuminating). Elements of Sonata Theory is one of those books that I've been meaning to read for a long time but have yet to get around to. I'll try to procure a copy. Ah! The connections are becoming more evident. Me too. It is a great pleasure to discuss music with like-minded individuals. Please do. As for me, I haven't written anything in a long time, but I might try composing something in the Classical style in the coming weeks. I feel inspired by all the well-crafted music I'm discovering here at this site, including your own excellent violin sonata. Thanks! But no, I'm just a librarian who studies music on the side. I have a background in music, as mentioned earlier, but after college/conservatory, I put composition on hold for a few years in order to focus on other things. I always meant to get back into it, but not until the time was right. Maybe that time is now. Anyway, thank you again for sharing your music, and I hope to hear more in the future! Please let me know when the recording becomes commercially available.

The fourth string of the violin has been tuned down a whole step to F. Professional violinists are more than capable of playing (and sustaining) two notes at once, and they are often called upon to do so in the solo repertoire. See, for example, the opening measures of the Kreutzer sonata.

First off, let me say that this is an excellent piece and it was a pleasure to listen to, so thank you for that. It’s good to know that people are still writing in a Classical/Romantic idiom and that performers are still commissioning such works. It gives me some hope for the future. Some notes: In my first play-through, I thought the first movement was in sonata form. But when I went back to analyze it, I found that it is not. While it seems to follow sonata form in its broad outline (there is a slow introduction, a first theme, a second theme, a developmental section, and a sort of recapitulation), the details are anything but conventional. The first and second themes, for example, are both in the same key (F major), and the music that kicks off the “development” section, practically a theme in its own right, returns in the coda (transposed from Ab minor to the tonic). The “recapitulation,” if it really is one, seems to be an apotheosis or rhapsody of the various themes rather than a simple restatement. In the end, I don’t know what form this is, but I like it. And I don’t know if you started with a sonata form and changed things around, or if you just followed your artistic inclinations and ended up with something close to a sonata form, but either way, the results are refreshingly original. You’re obviously someone who knows the rules and is consciously choosing to break them. The second movement begins with an outline of a diminished chord in a contour that Wagner was particularly fond of (especially in his earlier operas), so it’s only appropriate that this section has the feel of a recitative about it. The diminished theme is then transformed into a major key for the ensuing “aria” which, appropriately enough, is accompanied by a pattern frequently found in Schubert’s lieder (not to mention bel canto opera). I think the second movement ends a little too early, but there’s an interesting consequence to its brevity: it makes the second movement sound like a prelude leading into the third movement. Or, to carry through with the aria analogy, it makes the second movement sound like a cantabile to the third movement’s cabaletta. If we think of the second and third movements as a double-aria, then we end up with a traditional, three-movement sonata: Adagio-Allegro (I), Cavatina (Cantabile and Cabaletta) (II), and Adagio ed intimo (III). Interestingly enough, the descending scale that opens the fourth movement is a transformation of the diminished theme that opens the second movement (with octave displacement taking the place of the anguished leap of a sixth). I don’t know if this was intentional or not, but it’s effective. Even though you say that the fourth movement was composed last, it’s actually my least favorite movement. My favorites are the first and the third. The earlier movements call to mind Schumann and Beethoven (particularly the motoric drive of the third movement), while the fourth movement gives the work a sentimental, almost elegiac quality typical of Brahms. Stylistically, I think this piece could pass for something written in the nineteenth century. If you had told me it was by Raff, I would have believed it. Whether it stands alongside the greats like Beethoven, Schumann, and Dvorak is another matter, but the potential is there, so keep writing. Again, this was a great pleasure to listen to, so thanks for sharing (I actually listened to it several times, and always found new details to appreciate). I hope you will post more pieces in the future, but you’re also welcome to message me about any new works you’ve written – I would be happy to review them. Thanks!

Very nice! Reminds me of the Strauss Burlesk, both for its quirky harmonies and for its acrobatic timpani part (which is probably a little too acrobatic here). A few notes: The bombastic main theme is repeated a few too many times, and all the tuttis have a "sameness" about them that only adds to the problem. It feels like the same 8 or so measures are being repeated with only an occasional break in between. A Scherzo (or Minuet) usually includes a contrasting Trio section, but I never get that sense of contrast here, because the B section is interrupted too many times by a bombastic tutti that either is or sounds just like the main theme. The third is missing from the final F chord in the main theme (m. 12, for example). I don't know if this is by accident or by design, but I suspect the former. Ideally, the grace notes on p. 10 should be eighths and sixteenths (instead of quarters and eighths). The woodwind sectional arpeggiation on p. 16 is very difficult to pull off in performance, and likely to be ineffective as a result. Maybe have just one instrument (clarinet, for instance) playing an upward arpeggio, and the other instruments starting on each beat (instead of each half-beat). The Horn 2 in m. 11 is playing a D when the other instruments are playing a Db. That said, I really like this piece. The orchestration especially is very well done. Good work, and thanks for sharing!

1. Stravinsky on Vivaldi, I believe. Not sure about any of the others, though I've heard 4 and 5 before. The target of 6 might be Rossini, said by Beethoven, but that's just a guess.

Nice, lush harmonies. I like it! But make sure you spell your chords correctly. The last chord and the chord in m. 9, for example, are both F#M7 chords, but they're misspelled as F#-Bb-C#-F (it should be F#-A#-C#-E#).

You don't really choose to be a professional composer. It's just something that happens over time. You start off as a performer who writes music on the side and keep at it until your writing gradually eclipses your performing (which might never happen -- it usually doesn't). Eventually, if you're lucky, you'll get to focus more on composing rather than performing, at which point you might become a full-time, professional composer. In today's market, that's probably around the age of 30 at the earliest. So you have plenty of time to think about it. In the meantime, I will say this: You absolutely do not need to major in Composition in university to be a composer. In fact, I would highly discourage anyone from taking this route. It's far better to get a more marketable degree (pretty much any other music degree is more marketable) and pursue composition on the side.

Thanks! I haven't done much experimenting with sound libraries yet. The sound quality is a big step up from standard MIDI, so I'd like to start using sound libraries at some point, but I've heard they can be quite time-consuming, and I'm not sure I have the technical expertise or patience to get the most out of them. You've probably heard Delius's music, even if you've never heard of him. The Florida Suite and On Hearing the First Cuckoo in Spring are both excellent introductions to his work. He's sort of a more Romantic and English (and therefore straight-laced) cousin to Debussy, yet wholly original at the same time. I hadn't noticed, to be honest. Now that you point it out, I can see that the similarities in the opening measure of the two pieces, but they go in very different directions after that, so I don't think it's an issue. If you want to see some true Mahler ripping-offing, then check out "Hell's Picture Scroll" from the Ran soundtrack. If you know your Mahler, then you'll recognize the similarities right away (hint: Das Lied von der Erde). Ah. No issues there then.

I'd be interested in hearing these pointers. Personally, I had no issues following the score, but then, I'm not a conductor.