Symphony No.1 - First Movement

Dear fellow composers,
 

Today I would like share one of my very dedicated piece to you, Symphony No.1. I didn't write regularly so the work was written for almost 1.5 years if I rmb it correcty.

Yes. Another orchestral work. But I really think only this legitimize as my "first" symphony with its length and complexity. 

To be honest, I can't think of a good, or descriptive name for this work, so let's make it sound "systematic" for the moment.

I personally quite like the main theme of this movement - quite lyrical and grand. 

I am writing the second movement and I did think of "Desparate and Hope" but let's just put it aside first.

Please enjoy the work and see what you think.😀

HoYin

Hi @HoYin Cheung!

I found myself listening casually without looking at the score and I must say that I found the beginning quite accessible and easy to understand.  I think, though that it's unusual to go straight into the exposition of the main theme like you do here.  Usually there's an introductory section before the exposition which helps build some suspense and expectation.  So when the theme finally does come in it would bring a sense of coming to fruition.

Your discordant sections of this symphony are actually still mostly accessible to me.  They seem to be written sort of in the same vein as Mahler's bombastic symphony movements.  There's an emancipation of dissonance but it's still grounded in tonality which makes for an entertaining listening experience for me.

I've only listened to this twice, but it seemed to me like the movement didn't end - it just stopped.  I had to check whether the piece was posted in the incomplete works/writer's block section of the forum LoL.  Maybe it's supposed to lead smoothly to the next movement?  I thought I heard the piece gradually letting up in intensity as it neared the end but then that was contradicted by more intense gestures.  And it seems to stop as if in the middle of a phrase.  I think this piece definitely deserves a more final sounding conclusion!

Thanks for sharing!

Peter

The stylistic juxtaposition just feels a bit jarring to me. One moment it seems like it's going to be a very "conventionally tonal" piece, but even the "emancipated dissonance" sections seem to be approaching that goal with different degrees of respect for tonality. Some parts honestly just sound like wrong notes, while others seem highly logical (in a very Mahlerian sense). It could be a matter of how you juxtapose dissonant sections right next to highly consonant sections and give us a contrast we were not expecting.

I actually have no problem with you introducing us to your "big tune" right away -- some of my favorite symphonies do this very successfully, such as Schumann's 3rd. You've got to be sure you have a knockout tune in order to do this, and yours is pretty good, so I don't take issue with any of that.

It feels like you are at your most compositionally fluent with the aforementioned Mahlerian type of writing, passing themes around through various sections of the orchestra and giving us this free-flowing swirl of contrapuntal development. These are the passages that feel the most coherent and "natural". I have to say that the manner in which you accompany your themes at other times can come across as pedestrian or even "naked" compared to that dense, flowing counterpoint you offer us throughout a majority of the piece. The texture is just "too simple" when put up against the surrounding context. It might work in a different context but I'm not entirely sure I completely "buy it" in this piece from a narrative standpoint.

@PeterthePapercomPoser I am glad my music is more accessible this time. I am always fond of making a symphony starting with a lyrical, grande Russian theme. I had thought of making a introduction before the theme, but I just find it hard to write a development to the theme without shadowing it (in terms of dynamics/ complexity). There could be lengthy long string chords holding but it may lose your (or at least my) interest. So I decided that to make it straight to the theme.  

For the ending section, there will be an attacca to the next movement. I don't want to end strong in first movement - would rather some momentum for second movement.

@Aria Donn Thank you for your listening! I am quite surprised both of you recognized my music a "Mahlerian" work (in some place) - Perhaps there are some subconscious impact from him - but yes, that's my way of writing - passing the motive between different instruments and purposely stack them to develop new materials. However, in terms of harmonic langauge, my work might be more "harsh" than what Mahler did. That's my long developed style - perhaps my prefered way of writing - even I am already quite "conservative" in the consonant part (as compared to my other works full of dissonant stuff), I just can't help to add a touch of harsh feeling to it - like a drama cannot be complete just with pure joy - but usually coming with some twist and hopeless scene.  After all, I agree it is a hard thing to balance two contrasting types of harmonic materials. And I hope I can master it one day.