James

To add to this comment would be redundant, as it encapsulates exactly what I wish to say. Outstanding work, exceptional piece of music.

Would anyone who has heard the piece before like to comment?

Unfortunately, I can't really offer you specific rules from a music theory standpoint, as the style itself is still somewhat incipient. However, as I'm sure you already know, it is based on the repetition and slight variation of a specific motif. The motif is generally stated simply early on in the piece and then repeats extensively throughout, undergoing slight modification during the development section. From my experience with the genre (mainly the works of Phillip Glass and John Adams) the piece can have a formal coda or simply come to a stop. I, too, have become a fan of this style and have written several pieces in it, though I remain a Romanticist at heart :P I strongly encourage you to listen to the two above mentioned composers (Glass and Adams) to enhance your understanding of the genre in a very modern context, as both of them are still alive and working on new pieces. Though arguable, some would consider Shostakovich a minimalist composer, yet in a far less strict sense than most modern composers of the same ilk. I believe it is certainly a worthy endeavor as a composer of classical music to become educated and familiar with this contemporary style, regardless of whether one chooses to embrace it, as it is presently en vogue and ostensibly the future direction of "formal music" in general. The best way to learn, as with most things, is by doing. Write a few pieces in the style to the best of your ability and go from there. Regarding specific intervals, I would suggests you keep your harmony "open" if you're looking to achieve a modern sound, that is, use fourths and fifths of the tonic with no third---the use of a third is a very conventional practice and, consequently, makes for a traditional sound. Seventh and ninth chords sound more "jazzy" or Debussy than minimalist, but you should really just experiment and see what appeals to your ear. Good luck and best regards for the future!

I recently had the privilege of hearing this work performed live by my local professional orchestra (Louisville Orchestra) and considered it worth mentioning on this forum. I, for one, had never heard nor heard of this piece by Tchaikowsky prior to this performance though I consider myself a fan of his music, particularly his symphonies and concertos (his violin concerto is one of the best concertos from the Romantic period). Anyway, it is a supremely dramatic and arresting work, distinctly Tchaikowsky yet somewhat thicker in texture (more like Brahms) than his usual, sectionalized style. I believe anyone who is a fan of Romanticism or Tchaikowsky will be moved and enlightened by this dark, deftly scored piece. The title, Francesca da Rimni, refers to a beautiful woman in Dante’s Divine Comedy who is condemned to hell, which takes the form of an eternal windstorm, for being an adulteresses. She and her extra-marital partner (the brother of her husband) are both forced to wander endlessly through the storm together, though unable to touch or speak to one another. The music employs chromatic runs throughout to represent the torments of hell and of the lover’s yearning, unquenchable affections. This piece is an obscure gem by the composer that I wished I had heard a lot sooner in my career as a listener and composer. For a good recording, I recommend Neeme Jarvi’s interpretation with the Gothenburg Symphony which can be found here.

I must say, I was truly astounded by this piece. Works of any substantial quality are often the exception rather than the rule on this forum, yet your piece exemplifies the small pocket of truly prodigious talent that exists in this "online community." With reference to your work, I can honestly say that it sounds to be of professional quality. Your sense of harmony, tension/release, chord progressions and voice leading is extraordinarily competent. Of particular note is this piece's seeming timelessness. It exhibits a very modern sense of drama and theatrics while simultaneously maintaining a pious, regal quality of the high Baroque or perhaps even Medieval period. In short, it evokes notions of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven and even Mahler. Despite your personal fear of a "conservative harmony," I do not see the need for any drastic harmonic changes, unless you are aspiring to something exceptionally avant-garde. Please continue working on this piece and pursue it to completion. I look forward to hearing the subsequent sections and, ideally, a live performance.

Thoughts, criticisms...?

I recently completed a set of 5 short pieces for solo piano and am curious as to how they will be perceived by various listeners. I wrote these in dedication to Dmitri Shostakovich and quote from him several times, (more on that below) those these works are not intended to be a pastiche of any kind. They are atonal, though seldom dissonant. At the very least, I do not use dissonance for mere "shock effect" or to be intentionally grating on the ears, but generally for the sake of contrast, perhaps to cut through a dense section with a pulsating rhythm. I consider these pieces to be somewhat modern and/or experimental, but this is simply my take on them based upon how they sound alone and not upon the fact that they necessarily satisfy any formal requirements of the minimalist style as such. As mentioned in the title, they are all quite brief, between 1 and 2 minutes in length , as well as autonomous. Though they were written as a set, I feel as though each should be able to stand alone in its own right as there is not intended to be any continuity between each piece. No. 1 Probably the most capricious (and to some, maybe even schizophrenic) of all the pieces, it manifest itself as a sort of Shostakovich-inspired patchwork quilt, each section alluding to a different facet of his musical personality, from improvisatory and virtuosic to simple and introspective. No. 2 A somber, waltz-like piece that is intended to evoke the sound and feeling of Russia. Sparse in texture to represent austerity and melancholy in mood to represent the prevailing cultural sense of Weltschmerz. No. 3 Rhythmically driven and also thin in texture. Reminds me slightly of Cage's style when writing for piano. Intended to sound carefree yet thoughtful/inquisitive, as though one is playing the piano in a sort of absent minded way searching for the answer to a question or an interesting idea. No. 4 Opens with a direct reference to the DSCH motif, trudging heavily into a series of repeated chords coupled with an underlying bass ostinato meant to represent Stalin in my own way. The intensity grows, resulting in a climax of thick, dissonant chords followed by a somber note in the piano's lowest register. However, the DSCH motif returns, as Shostakovich was able to prevail artistically in spite of Communist Russia's stringent artistic censorship. No. 5 A free form fugue in two voices (more of an invention, actually) the includes a reference to the diminished 6th interval that opens Shostakovich's 5th Symphony in the middle section. Mainly written as a personal challenge, an attempt to write atonal counterpoint without it sounding like dissonant garbage. You can be the judge as to whether I succeeded in my endeavor to do so. I shared these pieces with a friend who did not care for them. Thus, I wanted to get a "second opinion" of sorts by posting them on this forum. Maybe they really are nothing but rubbish! Hopefully, they will not cause Shostakovich to turn over in his grave... PDF Scores and a link to Soundclick where all 5 pieces can be heard follows: SoundClick MP3: James Huddleston - Band page with free MP3 music downloads on SoundClick No. 1.pdf No. 2.pdf No. 3.pdf No. 4.pdf No. 5.pdf

Quick post regarding the proper form/structure of 1) an overture 2) a standard three movement concerto Is there a set, definite form for these two types of pieces and, if so, what? Note that when I refer to form I am talking about things such as Rondo, Sonata-Allegro, Ternary, Binary, etc. Thanks for your help.

I appreciate everyone's advice about using Audacity, but how would I manage the balance of the instruments? Wouldn't they all end up sounding at the same dynamic level and mush together if I merged individual parts in Audacity?

If a score plays back with clipping issues using GPO Sibelius (due to lack of computer memory) will the clipping be transfered to a CD if I then export the audio file as such? Also, is there any way to reduce clipping during playback without cutting the number of instruments used? Does it help to notate three parts for, say, flute, on one staff in multiple voices instead of three indiviual staves? Thanks for any responses.

I was very impressed with your piece. I do not feel the need to comment extensively except to say that some of the harmonies could be thinned a bit in certain places, just to enhance the top line. I know you were going for thick and oppressive (which came off very effectively), but brief, occasional relief from the continual block chords would actually enhance the dark, cynical mood. I think that many of the negative comments this piece has garnered are simply from people who have an intolerance of dissonance (like I once did). However, in time, I have grown to appreciate it as a useful device for expressing a range of emotions/ideas. Your work is already very mature, and I recommend you listen to and learn from some other like-minded individuals. One specific composer I would like to mention is Thomas M. Sleeper Give him a listen and see what you think. Eager to hear more of your work.

I must say, you are a master of deception. :w00t: Once again, your opening lures the listener in with an intriguing woodwind melody, yet the rest of the piece has no sense of direction. The melody you give to the solo violin seems to wander aimlessly and the lack of cadence is quite unsettling. Honestly, I think you have a pretty sound harmonic style, but your melody lines need considerable work. A melody (particularly one written in the Romantic style which you seem to favor) should be easy to remember, hum and whistle. If it isn't, then it isn't a very good melody, at least in the traditional sense. Motifs are even more memorable, only consisting of a few notes. For instance, the 4 note opening of Beethoven's 5th is said to be the most recognizable motif in classical music of all time. Regarding melody, you would benefit enormously from studying some of Tchaikovsky's symphonies and his famous violin concerto (though I don't suggest you attempt to write anything like that just yet--- the solo part is supposedly one of the most technically difficult pieces in modern violin repertoire.) He had a excellent sense of lyricism and was also one of the prolific composers who epitomized the Romantic era sound--- lush, grand and emotional. I imagine you will enjoy him as you already write in his style. Keep composing and keep learning. I, too, have a long way to go.

While this concerto is far superior to many I've encountered on this board, it is still lacking considerably in certain areas. Your introduction is compelling and generates interest and anticipation in the listener. However, what follows fails to satisfy. Your opening theme is moderately good (it reminds me of the Bruch concerto... was this intentional?) though you fail to expand on it adequately throughout the remainder of the piece. Also, your part writing is rather dull and monotonous, albeit I readily admit that many prominent composers neglected the orchestra when writing a concerto and, in truth, the orchestral part should be rather banal to draw attention to the soloist. They are playing, after all, the accompaniment. The piece is very solid technically, but lacks musical/emotional appeal. As stated, the repetitive themes and predictable harmonic changes are lackluster at best. Lastly, please do not abuse the trill. Once again, you are certainly not the only composer guilty of "trill exploitation", but whenever I hear frequent, extended trills in a solo passage in a concerto I always think "well, evidently the composer could not think of anything to write here so he just stuck in a trill for good measure." This is my personal take on the matter, but many players and audience members alike will tell you that overused trills get boring very quickly. In a more general sense, the solo violin part isn't very virtuosic for a Romantic concerto. Modern-day players are quite adept at dealing with far more difficult parts that what you have written in this piece. Don't get me wrong though--- one should never sacrifice beauty and lyricism for empty technical flourishes. I realize that this review probably sounded terribly harsh, but believe me, if I didn't think your piece had excellent potential, I would not have bothered critiquing it. Many of my criticism are merely based on opinion, not justifiable facts. Regardless, I still think you should consider revising this piece to turn it into something truly outstanding. Look forward to hearing more from you. EDIT: This review only applies to the first movement, Allegro con fuoco. I did not listen to the second movement.

Okay, now I'm jealous. :P I too recently wrote a pizzicato passage for strings and yours makes mine seem like something a 3 year old scribbled out in two hours (despite the fact I spent over a week on that one section alone!) May I have permission to use your passage in my work? If you don't give it to me, I'll just steal it from you HAHAHA.... Seriously, that was one of the best pizzicato pieces I've heard... from anyone. You still suck for being better than me, lol. Best of luck to the rest of your piece.

No more comments? I really do want to know what people think...