Symphony in G minor

Another old symphony that I've revised a little bit in the past week.  This one looks to the "Strum und Drang" symphonies of Haydn for inspiration, and is mostly Classical in idiom, though it does some decidedly un-Classical things harmonically in a few places (e.g. there's one moment where we go all the way around the circle of fifths via a series of distant chords).  I'm curious whether people find that those moments are jarring or if they seem to fit.  I'm also aware that the horn part calls sometimes calls for a high degree of agility, but I decided not to extensively rewrite it, since I think it's still playable on the modern horn.  Anyway, any comments, criticisms, or other feedback would be most appreciated.  Thanks!

Okay, let's explore this one.

First movement: Regardless of whatever comes next I liked the first two phrases (M1-12), let's see how the piece keeps going. I must say that whatever you do to create the sound, it's amazing. The score can be easily followed by now; sometimes big symphonies with lots of instruments are a bit of a pain to read for the first time (well, sometimes single instrument pieces are too). The development up to M30 is impeccable, and it continues silently to build up again and reach a major section and then repeat. As I said, impeccable. No comments from M80-109, I'm just enjoying it. I also like how the first motive evolved and how you use this as a kind of "answer" :

I would keep annotating things I liked but that seems to be nonsensical to me. I would flood the comment with MX-Y unnecessarily. I will only write that the path you chose to go to the reexposition was very solid and beautiful in my opinion.

Second movement: its beginning didn't convince me as the prior movement did, but it rapidly won me again. Loved some legato motives like M89-92. Seems like you went "out" a bit in M126-137. I did not expect that kind of sound, it surprised me in the good way. I guess I have a liking for more intense movements but despite feeling this one a little weaker than the first I overall liked it a lot.

Third movement:  Wooooah, top tier beginning with those accentuated notes! The silence in M18 as well as a few others (or maybe just one, I am not sure) in the 2nd movement don't totally convince me, in some cases they're perfectly suited but in this case specifically I felt an abrupt, unwanted pause. But this is just my opinion anyway. You won me again with the all string pizz. and the question-answer section alternating bass and treble instruments.

 The trio is very joyful and makes another good contrast with the first section of the movement. 

Fourth movement: And here we are an hour later in the grand finale. Seems very promising from what I read. Let's listen to it:

The first measures seem a little demanding but nothing that professionals couldn't work out in a session or two I guess, and it sounds powerful. 10/10 on M69-72 resolution of the first theme. The triumphal tutti in the second theme fits very well in my opinion with what precedes and succeeds it. But you don't leave it like that and go further in that triumphant emotion after the repetition with the first section main motive. However, again you paused the music at M147 whereas I would have lasted longer in that climax. From that part on I just enjoyed how you play with bass and treble voicing as well as the motives you built and didn't let myself go off by details. The coda was again very solid and properly composed.

My sincere congratulations, you have created a solid, beautiful, sometimes excellent symphony. It is probably one of the best pieces I have heard here, directly competing with other 2-3 max. The first movement was specially pleasant to hear for me, it is my favourite despite all of them being very good. I don't regret a single second I dedicated to carefully listen to your piece. After this I'm definitely going to listen to it again without rewinding parts or entire movements. Thank you so much for sharing this here, I will try to share it myself among my friends (and perhaps in twitter though I have zero influence there lol). Hope I haven't been too dense BTW, I could have been more specific but I don't think this work needs many corrections or corrections at all.

Regarding your question: they fit to me.

Let me ask one: How did you make such epic orchestral sounds?

That's all. Again, congratulations and see you in the forums!
Kind regards,
Daniel–Ømicrón. 

Wow, thank you so much for your detailed comments and your kind words about the piece!  I'm glad the "un-Classical" moments weren't jarring to you.  I take your point about some of the pauses being disruptive to the flow.  Not sure that there's anything to do about that here, but it's something to keep in mind in future writing.

The sounds are all from Finale with a couple of plug-ins: NotePerformer for the VST, and Waves IR-1 reverb.  I bought these about two weeks ago, and was so impressed with the way they sounded that I pulled out this and a few other old works, ran them through, and made some revisions.

And yes, feel free to share this with anyone you think would enjoy it.

Thanks again!

 - Aiwendil

Really nice job! I'm often critical in this forum about people writing music that lives in the past, but you've brought enough of your own voice to the Classical style that it feels alive now. And yup, you can write counterpoint.

The 3rd and 4th movements held my attention more than the first two. (To be honest, I kind of skipped most of the 2nd; maybe I'll go back to it later.) Two comments off the top of my head, first just technical: in the 3rd movement think about how you're notating your altered tones. The B-natural in bar 6 is really functioning as a C-flat (and of course to a human violinist they're not the same note). Second, I thought you could have gone farther afield in the coda of the last movement, from bar 287 to the end. The strings settle into a matted texture at bar 296 that feels anticlimactic compared to what came before.

Congratulations on wonderful and well crafted piece of music!

I really enjoy the contrasts in this music, in the language you are true to the style. I really like ms 21 - 34.  This shows how good you are. Very dramatic in my ears. While i was ilistening i thought to myself, the motive fits perfect for a sequence of fifth, and in ms 134 it came. Very ncie. The "coda" in 144 an onwards was a little too far form the style for my taste.

For me the first movement was the best, that one sounded most classical. Movement 2 and 3 was very nice too, but each movement sounded more modern and not classical like the first one. Still very well crafted.

The last movement was fire and fury. You are more classical in style here, but still less then the first one. Still very good.

SimenN

Thanks very much to both of you for your comments!

Quote

The B-natural in bar 6 is really functioning as a C-flat (and of course to a human violinist they're not the same note).

You're quite right about this.  I normally try to write enharmonics "correctly" even if it means writing a lot of double flats or double sharps, but somehow I missed this one.

Quote

Second, I thought you could have gone farther afield in the coda of the last movement, from bar 287 to the end. The strings settle into a matted texture at bar 296 that feels anticlimactic compared to what came before.

Again, I agree.  In fact, my own feeling is that the coda of the last movement is the weakest part of the piece.

Quote

For me the first movement was the best, that one sounded most classical. Movement 2 and 3 was very nice too, but each movement sounded more modern and not classical like the first one. Still very well crafted.

Yes, my goal here wasn't to imitate the Classical style exactly, but there's a fine line between bending the style and breaking it.  I do think the 3rd movement probably goes a little too far and ends up doing the latter.