AndreasKrebs

Here's a slightly more readable score of the first movement: http://www.andreaskrebs.de/assets/media/Erste-Andante.pdf Still no articulations, dynamics and tempi, but the most :blush: horrible unreadabilities might be fixed now. Thank you very much for listening (and reading), Andreas

karelm, Mr.Snow, thank you very much for your (additional) input! Thank you for the hint - I will check the book. I've read Hermann Erpf: Instrumentation (Schott, 1959) and some theory books by Diether de la Motte (difficult readings for me...) Concerning Adams: I know the "Short ride in a Fast Machine" and "Harmonielehre" and I like these pieces very much (although minimal is generally not my favourite music). Composers I love most are Bruckner, Beethoven, Simpson, Holmboe, Rautavaara, Shostakovich, Mahler (and some more). The most impressive one when it comes to large scale is Bruckner for me. The beginning of my piece is probably the most problematic part. It is the oldest part (containing some things I probably would do in a slightly different way today) and the other movements take many of their ideas from the first one. (This shall not excuse lack of structure, of course...) Thanks for the remark concerning foreground/background: I wanted some kind of "polyphonic sound". However, even truly polyphonic music will generally help listeners with foreground / backgrund, so I'll have to work on this. Oh, sorry - misunderstanding: the contrast was a goal for the THIRD movement (and could maybe be better balanced). I completely agree to the point that the climax of the SECOND movement would need some motivation / preparation (I just didn't have good ideas for this...) Since there are recurring themes (and variations), I believe, the static aspect and lack of cionsistency has probably the reasons mentioned before(mainly clear structure, as well as foreground/background)? Again, thank you very much for taking your time to give me some feedback on my music. It is very valuable for me to have some musician's remarks and advice. Kind regards, Andreas

First of all comes Anton Bruckner. (Then? Beethoven of course, Mahler, Shostakovic, Holmboe, Simpson, Rautavaara,...) Cheers, Andreas

Hi karelm, thank you very much for your comments! Lack of structure is an important remark for me: development of themes is in most cases rather a variation, combination or (in lack of better words - sorry) "metamorphosis". But apart from microstructures / usage of material, I understand you also mean the overall dramaturgy of the parts? (which would be a very important remark for me: I've listened to this piece too often to be able to percieve this kind of shortcomings...) Thank you for the comment regarding orchestration and my usage of staccato elements - is this similar for all movements? I'm aware that the third movement uses lots of staccato, however for the others I had the feeling (which may of course be VERY misleading - that's why I ask for comments!) that everything else is somewhat "balanced". The end of the second movement could use some preparation and motivation before. The contrast between the beginning and the rest of the third movement was meant to be a contrast (however, this does not imply this was a good idea...) What was I after? First of all, I have no formal musical training (besides reading some books, half of which I may have understood). However, making music always was one of the best things for me I can imagine. I wanted to write an orchestral piece with a rather reduced set of themes / basic building blocks. I enjoy very much when many things happen simultaneously (this may be the reason for many disjunct staccato elements and as well for bad voice leading). So, still I don't know if it was too ambitouos to present this piece here - however I am very grateful for any comments from you. This helps me to learn and improve things. Kind regards, Andreas

Dare I post here? Well, please let me know if this was over-ambitious...:whistling: During the last years (ok, since 2001), I wrote and re-wrote my first symphony. It consists of four movements (something like Andante - Adagio - Presto - Vivace). My aim was to write contemporary music, a little bit spicy perhaps but not atonal or avantgarde. Here are the links to MP3 files, encoded in 192 kbit/s: http://www.andreaskrebs.de/assets/media/Erste_Satz_1.mp3 (18 MB) http://www.andreaskrebs.de/assets/media/Erste_Satz_2.mp3 (12 MB) http://www.andreaskrebs.de/assets/media/Erste_Satz_3.mp3 (6 MB) http://www.andreaskrebs.de/assets/media/Erste_Satz_4.mp3 (16 MB) Since I used my DAW to compose, the score is quite terrible at the moment (no articulations at all, no tempi, raw midi data not quantified for better reading, etc.) - however, maybe this can help listening: http://www.andreaskrebs.de/assets/media/SymphonyNo1.pdf I would be very grateful for any comments on this little piece. Kind regards, Andreas

Wow, I really like this piece! :cool: It sometimes has reminescences of minimal music, sometimes of impressionist work, but it really has a new quality of its own. I like the "hypnotic" parts and how you manage to bring new ideas into them. Many surprises (but surely no effects on effects sake). Thank you for sharing, Andreas