Morgan Allan.

I really like it. I'm impressed. I like the classical sound, also that it shows lots of creativity in the orchestration, meaning that everyone is usually playing something interesting together. I also like that it has cohesion, in that it makes sense and flows along in a meaningful way. Very well done. I don't like the instrument sounds. They sound too artificial to me. I use a program called NOTION 6 which uses instruments of the London Symphony Orchestra and I suggest you look at something like that. Clearly you have lots of potential, but the fact that you put the Horns in G shows you also need to do some homework. Looking forward to what else you have. Morgan.

I love the beginning. You really achieved the effect of a sun-dappled forest. I also really like the Baroque section which reminds me of a Bach fugue in places and I wish you'd taken it further. But I'm not sure the 2 fit well together and I thought the ending was too weak.

I forgot to thank you Tom Statler. Your comment was exactly what I needed to clarify what I wanted and what I didn't want. Morgan.

Yes, they are free to improvise, but mostly as a predetermined and unified line for each instrument, rather than multiple variations per line of instrument. The piece was conceived with that flexibility in mind. But perhaps, "the freedom to alter or adjust or embellish" would be more accurate, because saying "improvise" has connotations of just making it up as you went along, which is not what I intended. This idea of "directed-improvisation" was very common in the Baroque era, with performers who would take the part that was written for them and then personalise it with their own style and virtuosity. But it also means the players are free to simplify their parts if they feel the need. Either way, an exact reproduction of every I wrote is unnecessary for the performance to be a success. In fact, my hope is that if the musicians feel the freedom to adjust the music to their preference and put their own creative input into the music, then maybe it will be a far better performance. Or do musicians prefer to play it exactly as they're told? Morgan.

This is my entry into the music composing competition in Sacile, Italy, that needs to be submitted by the end of this month, April. I would be very grateful for any comments regarding technical issues that would annoy conductors, confuse judges or distress players. The orchestra is made of very competent amateurs who have come together for a weekend conference, so the judges have asked composers not to unnecessarily stretch players. Any comments and criticisms gratefully received. Morgan.

In case you didn't see, I have posted a video of a studio orchestra playing the piece you liked and a score/audio video of another piece of mine that I really like, called Trumpet Passacaglia. Morgan.

Well Done! Beautiful waltzes, with lots of movement, but perfectly restrained; crafted like the Masters. You're very very talented.

Thankyou for your generous compliment. You are right about the importance of technology. My natural abilities are so inferior that I need modern technology to compensate for what I lack. Morgan.

The video of Prague Strings playing PASSACAGLIA #2. is now available by following this link. Musiversal is a very attractive option for young composers wanting to experience their music come to life with real musicians in a recording studio. It's relatively cheap, but I suggest you focus on making a 2 minute piece which they can record in a 15 minute recording session, unless you've got lots of money. It's very useful for creating a sort-of business card or product sample, that you can circulate to get the attention of people who may be interested in your other works. And it's fun. They have 3 different orchestras available as well as lots of other musicians. Just google their website. Morgan.

Passacaglia #2. New Version, Musiversal 1.3.22.mp3 Passacaglia #2. New Version, Musiversal 1.3.22.mp3 file:///C:/Users/Allans/Videos/Movie Maker/2022-02-27/5th attempt_0.mp4

When you start asking people for feedback, it suddenly makes you aware of how differently people listen to music. And by that I don't just mean that people are attracted to different types of music, but what they hear and how they process it is varies greatly. Some people use the keys and tonality as their point of reference, and each key change carries them to a new location. Some people want to feel the mood, the atmosphere or the tone colour of the instruments to feel pleasure and activate their emotions. Some people connect with the rhythm because of the way it draws or pulls their body to respond with movement. Some people are energized by layers of polyphonic texture (J.S. Bach) because of the way it stimulates their intellect with lots of musical information and logic. Some people (like me) tune into the narrative, the storyline, or the conversation between the instruments. Beethoven was very good at this aspect and so I tend to prefer him over others. It's important for you to know what exactly you like about your music, why you like it, and the type of people it will appeal to. I have listened to your music above twice and think you are very talented. Some parts of your music I really love. For example the Brass section starting at about 9.30 and lasting for nearly half a minute. It's the sort of music that I and others would pay money to go and listen to. But also, there's a personal issue with it that leaves me frustrated. This particular 30 second piece of wonderful music seems disconnected from what comes before and what comes after. I don't mean that you have joined them badly, your music actually flows along very nicely. It's just that to me, the musical ideas are too unrelated. It's as though you have served me up a plate of fried chicken, ice-cream and a peanut butter sandwich. All of which I love, but I don't understand why you've put them on the same plate. For someone like me who is following the storyline of the melody and the purposeful direction of the music, having so many different pieces all put into one item leaves me dis-satisfied and confused, even though I could appreciate all the bits individually. I just think it would be to your advantage for your creativity to flow in a more consistent and meaningful way. Sincerely, Morgan.

You are exceptionally creative. Your music is full of beautiful sounds and entertaining ideas. Possibly you have too much creativity squeezed in. By that I mean you have lots of wonderful themes all joined together, that don't necessarily flow together in a meaningful way. It's as though you've taken all the best 100 bits of your favourite movies and joined them together. The result is impressive, though a little unsettling, because it lacks a logical flow to make sense of it all. You have enough material to make 10 symphonies. My advice would be to pick a few themes that complement each other and then practice developing them in the way that classical composers did. If you did that, your music could be truly sensational. I have listened to lots of music and I don't think your ideas are too similar to others in a way that would get you into any serious trouble. Well Done. Morgan.

I was very impressed with your 2nd movement. The fact that you can write such lovely and meaningful melody and harmony, that actually has direction and purpose shows you have what it takes to be a composer. I would have altered the Bass/Tuba line at some point as I thought it was too much for too long without variation. There are lots of small, but important details to attend to in your score for next time. One example would be using both E natural and F flat, at the same time, when of course they are the same note, but presenting them differently causes confusion. I also notice that even though you use lots of thirds in the melody line, when it comes to important chords at the end of phrases, the 3rd. note of the scale is often missing from the chord. For example, building a chord out of C and F, but with no A or A flat to round it out. Well Done.