Symphony No. 2 in F# Minor

This is a symphony I completed yesterday, Christmas Eve. I had already published the first movement a few weeks ago and wished to share the other now-complete movements. The symphony follows the standard four-movement classical structure, however, I do have some doubts in this topic. For example, I added repetitions to both the (exposition) and (development+recap.) sections in the first movement, but noticed that Mozart himself normally doesn't add repetitions on the (development+recap.). Maybe this lead to excessive thematic repetition in the first movement, please tell me what you think! Also, regarding the last movement, I wrote a rondo even though I don't think Mozart's 4th movements from symphonies are strict rondos. Maybe I should have written the 4th movement in sonata form? One last thought regarding key: I opted to write dominant sections in Db major instead of C# major to facilitate performance (for example, the Minuet). Was this good practice, or would it be best to keep the dominant as C# Major regardless? Looking forward to your feedback!

The first movement is charming.  I will certainly listen to the rest when I have time.  I wouldn't second guess any of your musical decisions simply based on what another composer did.  While clearly you were inspired by classical form, it sounds fresh to me, so if it sounds right to you, you should be happy with it.

A

10 hours ago, bkho said:

The first movement is charming.  I will certainly listen to the rest when I have time.  I wouldn't second guess any of your musical decisions simply based on what another composer did.  While clearly you were inspired by classical form, it sounds fresh to me, so if it sounds right to you, you should be happy with it.

 

 

Thank you for the reply! Well, I definitely don't want to spend my entire life as a Mozart copycat, but since I'm still quite young, I don't think mastering old forms through masters like him would hurt. Nevertheless, I understand your point and will reflect on this topic!

Well hello there,

The first movement of this symphony is nicely structure! I see no structural problems. Kudos.  However, after a first listening I do notice some balacing issues. 

The remedy is easy: follow what Rimsky says in his book and it should be fine.  Ergo: 1 horn=2 woods and ect.   I also notice that sometimes dyamics suddenly change. Maybe that is on my end. Check that too..

34 minutes ago, Kvothe said:

Well hello there,

The first movement of this symphony is nicely structure! I see no structural problems. Kudos.  However, after a first listening I do notice some balacing issues. 

The remedy is easy: follow what Rimsky says in his book and it should be fine.  Ergo: 1 horn=2 woods and ect.   I also notice that sometimes dyamics suddenly change. Maybe that is on my end. Check that too..

 

Thank you for pointing this out! I have not yet read Korsakov's orchestration treatise but for some reason I remember reading somewhere that horns have half the power of other orchestral instruments, hence requiring their presence in four parts in romantic orchestras, opposing only two parts of each woodwind.

Thinking about it now though, I do think two modern french horns playing forte might cause balance issues (maybe I should've used 1 horn?). I believe using 18th-century instruments would solve the problem (it is possible since I wrote the entire horn parts using only natural harmonics of D), or even just playing the fortes as mezzo-fortes, like modern hornists do when performing classical-period works.

About the dynamics, you mean subito fortes might be a problem for the orchestra?

For balance, with the horns, a2 at forte is the same as one wood at same level.  Ergo, 2 horns=1 wood at the same level should be fine. But also, remember timbral characteristics, too.