symphony Symphony in F minor - First Movement

(I'm reposting here because I do not consider this a draft, though I will consider changing it after I'll get feedback)

This is the first movement to my first symphony. Drafts have been posted here: 

Symphony in F minor.pdf

Hey @Beethoven is God,

I'm not going to repeat what I've said in the post of your draft version!

I love your enriched orchestration comparing to your draft. The addition of b.61-69 for me is more balanced within the structure of the exposition.

-For me maybe adding a short transitional chord to modulate to A minor after the C major completion of the exposition will make it smoother, like what Bee did in his fifth symphony with a V/F introduced first after the Eb major completion of the exposition to get into F minor at the start of the development. But this can be personal.

-I think the development is too short, probably its staying in A minor without many modulations give me the impression. Maybe you can modulate to more distant key areas before going back to the F minor introduction in b.123. The materials for me is well developed. 

-Personally I may just delete the introduction section in b.123 to make the pacing much tighter, since I think here we are having a Macbeth-like or Beethoven-Fifth-Symphony-First_movement like movement here with the quick pacing and urgency of drama. Having a slow introduction reintroduced seems not quite probable for me. Again this is of course personal.

-I like your modifying the major sections to a minor mode in the recapitulation's 2nd subject, since it's not always to do but it's reasonable and fluent here for me. The ending is ambiguous though with a loud dominant chord followed by a weak unison of F. I'm sure that's intentional pave-away to later movements.

Thx for sharing!

Henry

14 minutes ago, Henry Ng Tsz Kiu said:

For me maybe adding a short transitional chord to modulate to A minor after the C major completion of the exposition will make it smoother, like what Bee did in his fifth symphony with a V/F introduced first after the Eb major completion of the exposition to get into F minor at the start of the development. But this can be personal.

Technically I'm still in C major until that G# appears.

15 minutes ago, Henry Ng Tsz Kiu said:

Personally I may just delete the introduction section in b.123 to make the pacing much tighter, since I think here we are having a Macbeth-like or Beethoven-Fifth-Symphony-First_movement like movement here with the quick pacing and urgency of drama. Having a slow introduction reintroduced seems not quite probable for me. Again this is of course personal.

Maybe... I'll see.

16 minutes ago, Henry Ng Tsz Kiu said:

The ending is ambiguous though with a loud dominant chord followed by a weak unison of F. I'm sure that's intentional pave-away to later movements.

Indeed it is intentional.

As a listener I give you my general impression.

I think there is a good use of the orchestral colors, including the brass, which are often half forgotten (by supotence). The percussion is also very good.

It seems to me that, as a whole, there is a predominance of homophonic texture. Although it is good, I miss some passages of another type. The rhythm is very well marked with the percussion and the instruments themselves.

There are some decisions, without being an expert, that I would have taken differently. For example to put the viols I in divisi and all the rest of the orchestra in fortissimo. However, the violins II double something else.

And a question: after the divisi in groups of instruments like the strings, I would indicate "unison", not "a2".

For orchestral strings, playing in unison is usually assumed, but if returning to unison from a divisi passage, "unison" (or "unis.") is traditionally used to indicate this. If returning from a solo string passage (in which only a single string player in a section is performing), "tutti" is used to indicate that the whole ensemble should play once again.

Certainly a great job.

A very interesting piece indeed, @Beethoven is God!

Speaking as an aspiring symphonist myself (check it out if you'd like 😉), there's a fascinating juxtapose between the full symphony orchestra you use and the type of material, which feels a lot like early Beethoven or late-ish Mozart and/or Haydn. I feel these classical-era parallels are exemplified by the short length of this opening movement, which is comparatively shorter than a lot of Romantic-era first movements. I'm not saying it's totally a bad thing; I find it fascinating, as it delivers a fresh kind of sound to what would have been a pleasant neoclassical listen!

I do agree with @Luis Hernández, however, in that the texture of the symphony is starkly monophonic, with an exacting emphasis on rhythm. I also share his sentiment in that the piece feels like it's missing something in certain places: though the whole orchestra is playing on full blast, the insides of the harmony almost feel hollow without much to hold it up. I will say that it doesn't detract much from this opening movement, so I suppose there's that 😅

One thing that does grate my ears a little (I don't mean to sound cocky or anything, sorry if I do!) is the ghastly sound of your playback, which I understand was most likely outside of your control. Of all the things that could have hampered my enjoyment of the piece, it's ironic that the one element which contributed the most to that contempt would be the one thing unrelated to your own musicality. Going forward, I'd suggest getting a sound pack to help enhance your listening experience; better yet, maybe download MuseSounds and upgrade to MuseScore 4. It works pretty well for me, and it sounds great while being totally free (and I'm not even sponsored by them!).

Overall, a wonderful piece. I'll be sure to take notes on how to write big tutti like yours, and will be looking forward to your 2nd movement! 😃

6 hours ago, Luis Hernández said:

For example to put the viols I in divisi and all the rest of the orchestra in fortissimo. However, the violins II double something else.

The Violins I are doubled at the woodwinds, V II, and Va.

6 hours ago, Luis Hernández said:

And a question: after the divisi in groups of instruments like the strings, I would indicate "unison", not "a2".

Oh right thanks.

6 hours ago, Luis Hernández said:

Certainly a great job.

Thanks a lot!

2 hours ago, Awsumerguy said:

A very interesting piece indeed, @Beethoven is God!

Thank you.

2 hours ago, Awsumerguy said:

Speaking as an aspiring symphonist myself (check it out if you'd like 😉), there's a fascinating juxtapose between the full symphony orchestra you use and the type of material, which feels a lot like early Beethoven or late-ish Mozart and/or Haydn. I feel these classical-era parallels are exemplified by the short length of this opening movement, which is comparatively shorter than a lot of Romantic-era first movements. I'm not saying it's totally a bad thing; I find it fascinating, as it delivers a fresh kind of sound to what would have been a pleasant neoclassical listen!

I'll check your works out indeed. As for my style - it is certainly Beethoven-ish. However I think that if Beethoven himself had the chance, he'd have used the full orchestra too.

For the length - I just followed the music. When it ended, it ended. However I did get it wrong when I repeated the intro. I'll have to elongate the development in order to remove that and keep balance, so next version might be longer.

2 hours ago, Awsumerguy said:

I do agree with @Luis Hernández, however, in that the texture of the symphony is starkly monophonic, with an exacting emphasis on rhythm. I also share his sentiment in that the piece feels like it's missing something in certain places: though the whole orchestra is playing on full blast, the insides of the harmony almost feel hollow without much to hold it up. I will say that it doesn't detract much from this opening movement, so I suppose there's that 😅

I'll look at improving that. It'd require completely rewriting the whole thing, but I'm willing to do so to make it better. However I do feel that polyphonic textures there will feel "pasted"... Maybe I can do that in the development, I'll see about that.

2 hours ago, Awsumerguy said:

Going forward, I'd suggest getting a sound pack to help enhance your listening experience; better yet, maybe download MuseSounds and upgrade to MuseScore 4. It works pretty well for me, and it sounds great while being totally free (and I'm not even sponsored by them!).

That was musesounds...

2 hours ago, Awsumerguy said:

and will be looking forward to your 2nd movement! 😃

I already started posting drafts. Check the link on the main post.

2 hours ago, Awsumerguy said:

I'll be sure to take notes on how to write big tutti like yours

I took my own notes from those better than me. Try classical music and early romantic or russian neo-classical/romantic.

As far as textures (orchestral, in this case) are concerned, it is not only necessary to stick to homophonic and polyphonic. There are more types and then subtypes and combinations between them.
For example, monophony (all in unison), homophony (all the same at different octaves), chordal (beginning of Bohemian Rhapsody by Queen), polyphonic (in all its degrees), heterophonic, polythematic, onomatopoeia, etc. ......

A good example of homophony is the beginning of Rimsky-Korsakov's Seherezade.

Like everything else, the question is to combine.
 

Actually I think Scheherezade is monophony.

But however, these are all still subtypes of Homophonic and Polyphonic types...

On 7/31/2023 at 10:43 PM, Beethoven is God said:

That was musesounds...

Just gave it a listen on my new computer. I stand corrected!