Concerto for Piani, Celesta and Strings

Hello everyone,

This perhaps is one of my complicated works. Not structurally, but rather developing new materials based on the 4-bar theme (Bar 22-25).

This work is written with the "layered" form/ texture, stacking materials vertically. I am not sure if it is accurate to say so, but I would label this work as "impressionistic".

The 7/8 metric and the shifting rhythms makes the piece less rigid. 

I quite enjoy the doubling of strings and piani, which is used extensively in this work. I also like that the celesta quite stands out from the orchestra, so I developed on the 4-chord motif (Bar 170-175) and made it the second theme. 

What do you think about this piece? Did I balance the piani/celesta and the strings well? Hope you enjoy this piece!

HoYin

I have just tried out Dorico+ Noteperformer 3 and it sounds much better! Please see this video instead:)

You're right. The Note Performer sound is much better.

I'm may not be the right person to comment on this piece. I want to hear more clearly defined themes that lead me somewhere. It seems like an avalanche of sound that after a while all sounds the same.

Perhaps I'm too conventional.

Cheers,
Jer

Lots of energy here!  It's a roller coaster ride .....

@Jerry Engelbach Thank you for your comment! I would say this is piece is of a hidden theme and variation form, which I add development and new materials in every "cycle", or in every section after a climax. And I have put more enthasis on thematic development in this piece. So it is normal you find some of the materials revolving. However, you will also notice as the work progresses, the new materials (like the celesta theme) will dominate and old theme (4-bar fugal theme) starts to fade out, like waves. Some composers may decide to make the ending "transformational", completely different ending from the beginning, but I decide to recapitulate and recall the theme as if I remind the audience what does the first waves looks like, for the sake of coherence.

Hope that answer your thoughts.

11 hours ago, MJFOBOE said:

Lots of energy here!  It's a roller coaster ride .....

 

@MJFOBOE Thank you! Which part do you enjoy the most?

I liked the "percussive" effect you create across all the instruments in the first movement.  I noticed in your second movement you have some interesting chords ... which I don't quite understand ... unless you want these dissonances: for example, measure 127 a g flat in the viola and a g natural in the violin, measure 129 f sharp in the piano and f natural in the cello?  This pattern occurs frequently.  I really like the rhythmic quality of the second movement.  In the concluding section measure 318, you have the violins in the highest register - have you discuss that measure with a violinist?  I was not taken with the Allegro motto section ... for me it was too dissonant and had less vibrancy than the other sections.  I have one more question, I really enjoyed the Celesta ...I am not a Celesta player although, I wonder how the resulting resonance might bleed a bit into the other notes in the more rapid passages?

@MJFOBOE Yes, disonance are there to make the chord uncertain.

For the high register parts, yes those are practical for proficient orchestral violinist. (as I play violin:))

For the Allegro molto section, it may not be that coherent to the previous sections, but actually it is an modified inverse-retrograde of the 5-note motive starting from bar 102, or even earlier from the last few notes from the first sentence of the main 4-bar theme. So it is also a part of the thematic development, and with the slow tempo and lower register, I also serve it as a buffer/break between the previous soli-listic development and the finale. 

For the celesta part, that's a great question! I would like to know that as well from a celesta performer.

1. At first sight I read: concerto for panini, celery and (cheese) strings. What a weird combo of ingredients LOL!

I honestly reckon most people are more used to the anglicised plural form of the word "piano", which is just "pianos", although "concerto" could be "concerti".

2. The opening rhythmic pattern is so attractive! It's hard to explain why it's attractive, but basically I feel some sort of "force" pushing the flow forward. You did not make it complex for the sake of complexity. That is good. 

3. Everyone, please listen to the YouTube version. The sound quality is much better.

Nice job HoYin! Beautiful work!  I think you need to upload "Concerto" to https://musescore.com/sheetmusic/symphony-orchestra. 

I listened to your piece twice, and here are a few comments:

Positive:

1. You held my attention for 13 minutes. Twice. Even on the second listening when I was thinking "I don't really need to listen to all of it," I listened to all of it. So there's something compelling there, even despite my less positive comments below.

2. There are interesting colors, particularly after the entrance of the synthesizer. Parts are reminiscent of Bartok's Music for Strings, Percussion, & Celesta, but it didn't feel derivative.

3. I'm craving a panini now but I don't know why. 🙂

Negative:

1. There's a lot of rhythm without phrasing; the lines have a lot of notes but not shape. Maybe that's a consequence of the computer performance, but I think it's also because in many places (e.g., around bar 51) the lines are so intertwined and yet offset from each other that they interfere with rather than enhance each other.

2. It would be interesting to hear how a human ensemble and a human conductor would interpret this piece, but frankly I think they would be driven crazy by the 7/8 (which one really doesn't hear in the recording because of the lack of phrasing). I love uneven meters, but because you often don't have consistent grouping of the 7 across parts (somebody's playing 3+2+2 while someone else is playing 2+2+3 while still someone else is playing 1+2+2+2), in practice this would be massively difficult to conduct and count. I think that 90% of the 7/8 sections could be written in 7/4, or alternating 3/4 and 4/4. You'd never hear the difference and it would be far more performable.

3. The ending could be more interesting. Feels a bit like, "Oh, I bumped into a major triad; I think I'll stop now."

4. And sorry if this is piling on, but I don't think it's really a concerto. There's a better title out there somewhere.