# String Symphony in E-flat major



## StevenOBrien

*Soundcloud*:

__
https://soundcloud.com/stevenobrien%2Fsets
*Score PDF*: http://steven-obrien.net/strsymph1op5.pdf
*Sibelius File*: http://steven-obrien.net/strsymph1op5.sib

This is my first "serious" attempt at composing something for a string orchestra (fresh from the orchestration manual), so I'm certain that I've made quite a few unforgivable schoolboy errors. Please be so kind as to point them out to me if you spot anything out of the ordinary.

Apart from the general stuff, there's three things in particular that I'm looking for feedback on. I'm aware that I have a tendency to write in quite a high register for the first violins, and that I write quite a few difficult multiple stops (If possible, I would intend for them all to be played as such, but I wouldn't have an issue with an orchestra choosing to play the more difficult ones as divisi. Every single one is possible to play, because I wanted this work to be playable by a string quintet too). I'm also wondering whether or not my excessive utilization of the double bass' C extension is acceptable. If any of you have any guidance or feedback to offer in these three areas in particular, I'd be very appreciative!

Also, I'd like to apologize for the subpar quality and sometimes glitchy nature of the mockup. I've been working on the mockup alone on and off for nearly a month now and I really just wanted to get the work released so I could move on to other things. Hopefully in the near future, I'll be able to rework things with a more suitable sample library, or even secure a recording for the work. For now though, it's as perfect as it's going to get with my current setup.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts and feedback, and I hope you enjoy it! Thank you for listening!

-Steven


----------



## hreichgott

A very nice Mozart tribute! At least it sounds like a Mozart tribute, with occasional contemporary moments here and there. Chordal melodies with some very strong thematic development. My favorite part is the first development section where it goes into Adagio. That's quite beautiful and it shows skill in bringing out different characters from one theme. Overall it's very well thought-through and is an impressive piece of work.

Your concerns about extreme high/lows: You'd have to ask string players about playability. (I do believe that the C extension on the bass, while more frequently used now than in years past, is not necessarily standard equipment and it might not be good manners to assume its presence. But ask a bassist to be sure.) I have an aesthetic concern which is that the extreme registers on most instruments and vocal parts tend to produce a more sound-effect quality than a melodic quality. On strings, the extreme low registers are no problem, they're still quite rich in tone and carry a melody just fine, but the extreme high registers tend to sound thin and stressed-out especially if used for extensive passages. That will be more noticeable on real instruments than on synthesized ones, although I notice it in your mockup too to some extent. Sometimes composers want that kind of anxiety-producing effect. But since this is on the whole a pleasant melodic Mozartean sort of piece, I wonder what was behind your artistic choice to use the extreme high register so much.


----------



## StevenOBrien

hreichgott said:


> A very nice Mozart tribute! At least it sounds like a Mozart tribute, with occasional contemporary moments here and there. Chordal melodies with some very strong thematic development. My favorite part is the first development section where it goes into Adagio. That's quite beautiful and it shows skill in bringing out different characters from one theme. Overall it's very well thought-through and is an impressive piece of work.


Thanks Heather, I'm glad you liked it! The adagio part is my favorite part of that movement too, it's a shame that it didn't come out too well in the mockup though. While I wasn't consciously trying to imitate any particular composer, I definitely think that there is a strong influence from Mozart's last trilogy of symphonies.



hreichgott said:


> Your concerns about extreme high/lows: You'd have to ask string players about playability. (I do believe that the C extension on the bass, while more frequently used now than in years past, is not necessarily standard equipment and it might not be good manners to assume its presence. But ask a bassist to be sure.) I have an aesthetic concern which is that the extreme registers on most instruments and vocal parts tend to produce a more sound-effect quality than a melodic quality. On strings, the extreme low registers are no problem, they're still quite rich in tone and carry a melody just fine, but the extreme high registers tend to sound thin and stressed-out especially if used for extensive passages. That will be more noticeable on real instruments than on synthesized ones, although I notice it in your mockup too to some extent. Sometimes composers want that kind of anxiety-producing effect. But since this is on the whole a pleasant melodic Mozartean sort of piece, I wonder what was behind your artistic choice to use the extreme high register so much.


I used it because the music _needed_ to go that high, which is very frustrating. It's not entirely out of incompetence, I'm aware that I shouldn't be writing in such a high register, but there was absolutely no other direction that the music could take other than up, in certain cases. It needs the breathing room.

I actually nearly abandoned the entire work and deleted the score out of continued frustration over the inability to write low B-flats in the basses, and the places where I had to compromise by choosing another note or write the B-flat an octave higher sound extremely bad to me, and they're going to be forever unfixable.


----------



## hreichgott

StevenOBrien said:


> I used it because the music _needed_ to go that high, which is very frustrating. It's not entirely out of incompetence, I'm aware that I shouldn't be writing in such a high register, but there was absolutely no other direction that the music could take other than up, in certain cases. It needs the breathing room.


You could make it a symphony for strings and piccolo? 

Seriously, I sympathize. I don't compose much, but I am sure there must be quite a tension between creating the notes you want, and writing in a way that will sound good on the instruments you intend to write for.


----------



## StevenOBrien

hreichgott said:


> You could make it a symphony for strings and piccolo?
> 
> Seriously, I sympathize. I don't compose much, but I am sure there must be quite a tension between creating the notes you want, and writing in a way that will sound good on the instruments you intend to write for.


XD, you're not the first person to suggest that!

And yeah, I do wonder though if it's just a part of growing as a composer. Learning to do more with less.


----------



## tdc

My 2 cents on this as an amateur who has less compositional training than yourself is you have a lot of things going for you, this piece feels fairly well put together and you have some good ideas. A lot of the harmonies in particular I'm hearing sound very fresh and very good to my ears, but the over-all format of the piece comes across as a little bit dated, and not as fresh. I'm actually craving hearing some of those harmonies within the context of something a little more modern. The section starting at about 41 seconds in sounds like something that Mozart has done in hundreds of his pieces and not like something that ever needs to be done by anyone else again. It turned me off to be honest to the rest of the work. Maybe you were just trying to create something in an older style as an academic exercise, but I think once you are able to find your own compositional voice you could compose some really great stuff. 

Just my humble opinion!!


----------



## StevenOBrien

tdc said:


> My 2 cents on this as an amateur who has less compositional training than yourself is you have a lot of things going for you, this piece feels fairly well put together and you have some good ideas. A lot of the harmonies in particular I'm hearing sound very fresh and very good to my ears, but the over-all format of the piece comes across as a little bit dated, and not as fresh. I'm actually craving hearing some of those harmonies within the context of something a little more modern. The section starting at about 41 seconds in sounds like something that Mozart has done in hundreds of his pieces and not like something that ever needs to be done by anyone else again. It turned me off to be honest to the rest of the work. Maybe you were just trying to create something in an older style as an academic exercise, but I think once you are able to find your own compositional voice you could compose some really great stuff.
> 
> Just my humble opinion!!


It's certainly a very logical thought to have, and I'd be very interested to have a discussion on the artistic merit of writing something that's imitative of an older style. Personally, I write this way because it's what I want to do. I love this style and I want to explore it as much as possible. I do it with the hope that I will take influence from more and more contemporary music, and the music of other eras along the way, and perhaps discover brand new ways of doing things as a result. I'm hoping that perhaps I can grow further from this style to create something completely new that's grounded in the music that I love the most, and if I don't, well at least I had fun doing it. I believe there's still a lot of potential locked up in this style that has just been skipped over. There's another direction to be taken away from Mozart, in addition to the one taken by Beethoven, for instance. We don't have to directly just follow every single composer that came before us, we can just work in parallel.

I don't see this as "imitating" though. When I write, I NEVER think "How would Mozart do this?" or "Would what I'm doing now fit within the stylistic idiom I'm working in?". I just let the pen take me wherever it wants to go. Sometimes it wants to write in a more conservative idiom, and sometimes it wants to do something completely bizarre! This is the 21st century, the age of eclecticism, and I can do anything I want! I can write a piece with a Mozartean-sounding exposition/recapitulation, and use tone rows in the development section! I can tell you with confidence, this is all me, this is all straight from my mind, my heart and my pen. It's influenced by Mozart, certainly, just as most music is in some way, but it is through my voice, and my pen. It's me. I may talk like Mozart in a lot of ways, but it's me!

Or maybe I'm just a deluded, cheap, good for nothing plagiarist imitator with no artistic value to my work whatsoever. Who knows? 

If you listened to this with the belief that it was written by an 18th century composer, would you be able to enjoy it more? If not, why can't you enjoy it as a 21st century composition? Why does the preconception make the piece itself worse? Is it a stigma we need to drop, or does it have validity? Why can't it just be enjoyed as music? Why does artistic merit have to come into the equation at all? I'm very interested to know, and I've never fully understood the argument.

I don't enjoy Mozart because he was innovative with chromaticism. I don't enjoy Beethoven because he was innovative with the use of motivic development. I don't enjoy Stravinsky because he did groundbreaking things with dissonance. No, I enjoy these composers because they wrote some bloody incredible and enjoyable music! If Mozart lived for a few more years and did as much with motivic development in the 1790s as Beethoven would do in the 1800s, how does that make something like Beethoven's 5th symphony less of a work? Perhaps it would give less validity to the claim that Beethoven was one of the greatest musical geniuses of all time, but how does an external influence like that make a piece of music worse? The notes on the paper don't change!

Thank you for sharing your opinion, and in a very friendly manner too! Most of the time, I get angry responses from conservatory students practically saying that I'm absolutely not allowed to do this and that I should write the way they want me to write! It's refreshing to hear a friendly voice for once.


----------



## jani

I listened the first movement, it brought some parts from Mozart's symphonies to my mind.
Is he a big influence for you?


----------



## Ramako

I can't help but be rather amused by your problem at need the violins to go too high. I'm sorry if that sounds sadistic - what I mean is that I have exactly the opposite problem - I have noticed that my textures are always too limited in range - and generally too low...

However, I must agree with you that the music demands the range. You clearly have a more extravagant style than me. I followed the first movement with the score and listened to the others, but in all cases it did seem necessary. I have no advice to offer in that case :lol:

I like the way you incorporate the scurrying lines into the texture. It's a nice effect - Mozart uses it of course - which I haven't made enough use of yet...

On the Mozart subject, there were a couple of passages - well one really - that reminded me of Mozart. I didn't hear him or pastiche in the rest - quite the contrary. However I write in a quite a similar style, so that is not surprising. Nevertheless, I would say that Schubert is basically copying Beethoven (the dotted rhythms) in one of my favourite pieces of music - the string quartet 15 - and it is one of my favourite pieces anyway. I noticed far more the exotic than the familiar in listening to your piece.

A random thought leaped into my head on reading your speech - from Mozart and Beethoven, but particularly from the twentieth century, composers have been forcing listeners to accept their music, though it seems too foreign to them at first. Perhaps now the task is different - to force listeners to accept that which at first seems too familiar?


----------



## StevenOBrien

jani said:


> I listened the first movement, it brought some parts from Mozart's symphonies to my mind.
> Is he a big influence for you?


Yes, the music of Mozart is my life.



Ramako said:


> A random thought leaped into my head on reading your speech - from Mozart and Beethoven, but particularly from the twentieth century, composers have been forcing listeners to accept their music, though it seems too foreign to them at first. Perhaps now the task is different - to force listeners to accept that which at first seems too familiar?


Perhaps, but I've been thinking about things a lot since last night and I'm starting to question how to proceed. I got another very negative comment elsewhere which included comments about my style, and I'm starting to feel that it's really going to hinder me unless I make a change. Perhaps it is too imitative and I do need to work hard on imitating much less. I'm just not sure how to go about it.


----------



## jani

StevenOBrien said:


> Yes, the music of Mozart is my life.
> 
> Perhaps, but I've been thinking about things a lot since last night and I'm starting to question how to proceed. I got another very negative comment elsewhere which included comments about my style, and I'm starting to feel that it's really going to hinder me unless I make a change. Perhaps it is too imitative and I do need to work hard on imitating much less. I'm just not sure how to go about it.


You shouldn't take negative comments so seriously because there will always be people who tell you how they don't like your style, no matter how big or good you become.

The better&bigger you become, the more fans you gain but you also gain more "haters". 
I once heard someone say, " You are no one until you have some haters."


----------



## tdc

StevenOBrien said:


> Perhaps, but I've been thinking about things a lot since last night and I'm starting to question how to proceed. I got another very negative comment elsewhere which included comments about my style, and I'm starting to feel that it's really going to hinder me unless I make a change. Perhaps it is too imitative and I do need to work hard on imitating much less. I'm just not sure how to go about it.


Even this person who was very harsh with you, started off by saying you are clearly talented, and I agree you are talented. So I would suggest to focus on the positives, you have a lot going for you and I don't think you have to completely re-invent yourself or do anything radical, just keep working at it and consciously try to sound a little more modern. There is no need to throw the baby out with the bath water. Keep following your heart but don't be afraid to try things you are unsure of at first, you might have to take some stabs in the dark but I think you will find your way.


----------



## hreichgott

I agree that finding one's individual voice is important, but I don't think that "consciously trying to sound modern" is helpful advice. Is there any particular reason to imitate modern composers instead of imitating classical ones? What if someone's individual voice *is* classicist in nature?

I say, start by imitating whoever inspires you the most, and you'll find the places you need to diverge from that on your own.


----------



## tdc

hreichgott said:


> I agree that finding one's individual voice is important, but I don't think that "consciously trying to sound modern" is helpful advice. Is there any particular reason to imitate modern composers instead of imitating classical ones? What if someone's individual voice *is* classicist in nature?
> 
> I say, start by imitating whoever inspires you the most, and you'll find the places you need to diverge from that on your own.


I agree with you on finding one's individual voice, but composers tend to build on what has already been done. By building upon music that is newer this is likely to lead to the creation of newer sounding music. Modern composers that are very inspired by these older forms are called _neo_ classicists as opposed to classicists. They are still keeping up with the sounds of their time by adding, or evolving a form rather than just emulating.

If the OP doesn't consciously try to sound more modern, the result is just continuing to write the same music I guess? Is that what you would recommend? Or just *unconsciously* trying to find his own voice? By modern I just meant 'new' or 'distinctive', not necessarily emulating any specific style.


----------



## StevenOBrien

I think I'm going to give it a try and try to write a "classical" piece (In that, it's intended to be a serious concert work rather than just a passing 3 to 4 minute piece), perhaps more in the vein of something like this:

__
https://soundcloud.com/stevenobrien%2Fsets

I think that style contains the bare essentials of the "classical era pastiche-ish" style that I like to use, but sounds much more contemporary and won't get as much criticism from those that really dislike "imitation".


----------



## Ramako

StevenOBrien said:


> Perhaps, but I've been thinking about things a lot since last night and I'm starting to question how to proceed. I got another very negative comment elsewhere which included comments about my style, and I'm starting to feel that it's really going to hinder me unless I make a change. Perhaps it is too imitative and I do need to work hard on imitating much less. I'm just not sure how to go about it.


This is an angry rant which will probably offend everyone, including you Steven. Never mind: I have been thinking these thoughts for a while now. I have used 'you' throughout this post mostly as a rhetorical figure, rather than as you specifically. This is me venting rather than giving you advice, to an extent. I am in no position to give you advice.

Any composer from Ligeti to Karl Jenkins to you or me will get criticism from some angle - but you know all this and you don't need me to reiterate it to you. It is your choice of course whatever you decide - and this is the important thing.

I know people like this (this guy at least gives constructive feedback which is better than others). The fact is that they are incapable of thinking outside of pastiche. All of their music is historicised - they can only judge 18th century music against an 18th century idiom - a group of rules that they have learnt is how 18th music should be. Some of your commentators say that they can't judge a piece of contemporary composition by 18th standards - but the fact is the way they judge contemporary composition is the same - they judge it as a pastiche of the present time, and hence by an imaginary set of rules of how contemporary composition ought to be. *All music is pastiche to such people, whether it be old or modern*. They are the ones who are emulating others, not us.

Their standards are imaginary. I have not seen a contemporary composer who seems capable of judging a composition on any musical matters, although I suspect I have had a bad sample. They _are_ probably capable, but they either don't think musicality matters, or they think that a composer ought to develop it themselves. 90% of the time they talk about notation - a worse waste of time I cannot imagine! 9% of the time what instrumentalists are capable of or what sounds nice on instruments - at least this has some merit to it. 1% is left for what actually matters in music. The review you link actually has more _musical_ feedback than I have seen from all the tutors at my university combined, which can be said in its favour, but still notice the ridiculous emphasis on notation and on how the score is presented. This is nonsense details and they ought to consider themselves above such pedantry.

The fact remains that some ordinary listeners hear 'conventionality'. You are a modern composer (as in writing today) and so when they listen to your music they come to it with a set of subconscious expectations. When these are not fulfilled they feel unsatisfied - unless you exceed expectations in other areas. This may never happen - but there is no benefit in being modern and unexceptional. Better to compose what you want.

Mendelssohn said that people will always try to dissuade you from what you want to do, but if a composer keeps doing what in his heart he knows he should do then in the end people will appreciate him for what he is: often people are swayed into doing what other people want, only just short of reaching this hallowed harbour, and then they never achieve anything of any worth.

The only thing that is sure is that a composer must remain true to themselves, because the composer writes the music and will write better what he/she wants to write. The milieu of the composer can only matter if it influences the composer him/herself. You might well gain from experimenting in more modern styles: I am very interested in learning modern styles, partly because I am interested in programmatic music in which stylistic diversity can be important. But I frankly hardly belong to this time. While postmodernism is in my blood, to an extent, my values and ideas and loves belong to an age about 1000 years ago. You probably have more sympathy with today's ideas and so today's means of musical expression may well express what you want to express more easily and more effectively. But then perhaps not. The only thing that is important is that you are true to yourself and don't write what other people want to do. Writing in a modern idiom because other people want you to is nothing more than populism, which is ironic, and in fact it is worse: it is snobbish populism.


----------



## StevenOBrien

Ramako said:


> Writing in a modern idiom because other people want you to is nothing more than populism, which is ironic, and in fact it is worse: it is snobbish populism.


I give up .

Seriously though, that response made me feel better about doing things. Thanks.


----------



## Ramako

StevenOBrien said:


> I give up .
> 
> Seriously though, that response made me feel better about doing things. Thanks.


No problem - your earlier speech helped me remember why I compose and encouraged me to compose what I want rather than just making long posts about it :lol: - so thank you!


----------



## moody

Just take in everything that may be said and take from it anything that may be helpful to you.


----------



## tdc

Ramako said:


> The only thing that is important is that you are true to yourself and don't write what other people want to do. .


Interesting ideas, but then why bother putting up music on a public forum asking for feedback? I absolutely think people should write what they want, but everybody can learn something from someone or perhaps gain a different perspective as well. That is not to say one should be discouraged by others from writing what they want, I think its a case of take what advice works and leave the rest. I've often thought (and expressed here) that people should be comfortable composing in whatever style they wish, (I absolutely believe this!), I also feel (and have expressed on this forum) that I think innovation in music is often very much over-emphasized nowadays. But that doesn't mean I think innovation should be discarded completely either. A small new twist on something old can go a long way.

I've not suggested the OP need to radically change anything, I also pointed out they were very talented when I offered what I stated was just the advice of an amateur. I see my post in this thread has roused some passionate feelings on the subject, so if nothing else at least it has lead to some interesting discussion.


----------



## Ramako

tdc said:


> Interesting ideas, but then why bother putting up music on a public forum asking for feedback? I absolutely think people should write what they want, but everybody can learn something from someone or perhaps gain a different perspective as well. That is not to say one should be discouraged by others from writing what they want, I think its a case of take what advice works and leave the rest. I've often thought (and expressed here) that people should be comfortable composing in whatever style they wish, (I absolutely believe this!), I also feel (and have expressed on this forum) that I think innovation in music is often very much over-emphasized nowadays. But that doesn't mean I think innovation should be discarded completely either. A small new twist on something old can go a long way.
> 
> I've not suggested the OP need to radically change anything, I also pointed out they were very talented when I offered what I stated was just the advice of an amateur. I see my post in this thread has roused some passionate feelings on the subject, so if nothing else at least it has lead to some interesting discussion.


Please don't think I was attacking you in my post - it was more aimed at some composition students and teachers who can be _very_ dogmatic about these things. As a listener your response is perfectly valid and I have grown to appreciate that that response is part of the listening experience, even though it is one by and large I don't feel. They are more interested in having you start from scratch in one of their accepted modes.

I agree that as composers we should be open to everything that will help us; but also not to be too keen to absorb things that won't. The former is more important though and it can be good to learn to compose to rules.


----------



## StevenOBrien

tdc said:


> Interesting ideas, but then why bother putting up music on a public forum asking for feedback? I absolutely think people should write what they want, but everybody can learn something from someone or perhaps gain a different perspective as well. That is not to say one should be discouraged by others from writing what they want, I think its a case of take what advice works and leave the rest. I've often thought (and expressed here) that people should be comfortable composing in whatever style they wish, (I absolutely believe this!), I also feel (and have expressed on this forum) that I think innovation in music is often very much over-emphasized nowadays. But that doesn't mean I think innovation should be discarded completely either. A small new twist on something old can go a long way.
> 
> I've not suggested the OP need to radically change anything, I also pointed out they were very talented when I offered what I stated was just the advice of an amateur. I see my post in this thread has roused some passionate feelings on the subject, so if nothing else at least it has lead to some interesting discussion.


Well, there's bound to be some ideas that resonate with the feedback seeker and some that don't. Again, feedback isn't about accepting everything that's given to you, it's just taking ideas and entertaining them, and figuring what the right path for you is. I don't see receiving feedback as receiving new ideas and new goals, it's all about discovering the specifics about your own internal goals and making them clearer

And just to clarify, you haven't at all offended me with your posting! I just get annoying statements a lot about this, especially on reddit, so it gets quite tiring to hear it again and again.

I'd be the first to suggest to someone only to take feedback that agrees with their goals. I suppose it just gets difficult to ignore feedback when you get the same feedback from different people, almost word for word, again and again and again.


----------



## Vivaldi

Ramako said:


> This is an angry rant which will probably offend everyone, including you Steven. Never mind: I have been thinking these thoughts for a while now. I have used 'you' throughout this post mostly as a rhetorical figure, rather than as you specifically. This is me venting rather than giving you advice, to an extent. I am in no position to give you advice.
> 
> Any composer from Ligeti to Karl Jenkins to you or me will get criticism from some angle - but you know all this and you don't need me to reiterate it to you. It is your choice of course whatever you decide - and this is the important thing.
> 
> I know people like this (this guy at least gives constructive feedback which is better than others). The fact is that they are incapable of thinking outside of pastiche. All of their music is historicised - they can only judge 18th century music against an 18th century idiom - a group of rules that they have learnt is how 18th music should be. Some of your commentators say that they can't judge a piece of contemporary composition by 18th standards - but the fact is the way they judge contemporary composition is the same - they judge it as a pastiche of the present time, and hence by an imaginary set of rules of how contemporary composition ought to be. *All music is pastiche to such people, whether it be old or modern*. They are the ones who are emulating others, not us.
> 
> Their standards are imaginary. I have not seen a contemporary composer who seems capable of judging a composition on any musical matters, although I suspect I have had a bad sample. They _are_ probably capable, but they either don't think musicality matters, or they think that a composer ought to develop it themselves. 90% of the time they talk about notation - a worse waste of time I cannot imagine! 9% of the time what instrumentalists are capable of or what sounds nice on instruments - at least this has some merit to it. 1% is left for what actually matters in music. The review you link actually has more _musical_ feedback than I have seen from all the tutors at my university combined, which can be said in its favour, but still notice the ridiculous emphasis on notation and on how the score is presented. This is nonsense details and they ought to consider themselves above such pedantry.
> 
> The fact remains that some ordinary listeners hear 'conventionality'. You are a modern composer (as in writing today) and so when they listen to your music they come to it with a set of subconscious expectations. When these are not fulfilled they feel unsatisfied - unless you exceed expectations in other areas. This may never happen - but there is no benefit in being modern and unexceptional. Better to compose what you want.
> 
> Mendelssohn said that people will always try to dissuade you from what you want to do, but if a composer keeps doing what in his heart he knows he should do then in the end people will appreciate him for what he is: often people are swayed into doing what other people want, only just short of reaching this hallowed harbour, and then they never achieve anything of any worth.
> 
> The only thing that is sure is that a composer must remain true to themselves, because the composer writes the music and will write better what he/she wants to write. The milieu of the composer can only matter if it influences the composer him/herself. You might well gain from experimenting in more modern styles: I am very interested in learning modern styles, partly because I am interested in programmatic music in which stylistic diversity can be important. But I frankly hardly belong to this time. While postmodernism is in my blood, to an extent, my values and ideas and loves belong to an age about 1000 years ago. You probably have more sympathy with today's ideas and so today's means of musical expression may well express what you want to express more easily and more effectively. But then perhaps not. The only thing that is important is that you are true to yourself and don't write what other people want to do. Writing in a modern idiom because other people want you to is nothing more than populism, which is ironic, and in fact it is worse: it is snobbish populism.


I listened to all of your piece and I have to say, it's quite good. Well done on being imaginative and courageous to attempt such a monstrous first attempt. However, there's a hell of a lot of improvement to me made. The piece lacks momentum towards the end. The ideas don't fit together with the rest of the piece to form a coherent whole work. Some parts are very well put together, like the start but unfortunately it falls apart half way through. I also dislike some of the bass sequences at the start but that's a matter of preference really.

In terms of technicality, your piece has a lot of errors. Many of the notes aren't playable, either too high or too low. The violin plays multiple notes simultaneously. I guess you know this is impossible (unless double stops - which they are not) and did this to economize the score's layout? I admit too many parts can be confusing to an amateur so this was a wise choice.

Good first attempt though. Keep working at it and you'll eventually get there.


----------



## StevenOBrien

Vivaldi said:


> I listened to all of your piece and I have to say, it's quite good. Well done on being imaginative and courageous to attempt such a monstrous first attempt. However, there's a hell of a lot of improvement to me made. The piece lacks momentum towards the end. The ideas don't fit together with the rest of the piece to form a coherent whole work. Some parts are very well put together, like the start but unfortunately it falls apart half way through. I also dislike some of the bass sequences at the start but that's a matter of preference really.
> 
> In terms of technicality, your piece has a lot of errors. Many of the notes aren't playable, either too high or too low. The violin plays multiple notes simultaneously. I guess you know this is impossible (unless double stops - which they are not) and did this to economize the score's layout? I admit too many parts can be confusing to an amateur so this was a wise choice.
> 
> Good first attempt though. Keep working at it and you'll eventually get there.


It lacks momentum towards the end? It falls apart half way through? Can you elaborate? Are you talking about a particular movement or the work as a whole? Can you be more specific about your qualms with the bass sequences and give examples or explain exactly what's wrong?

All the notes are playable, some are just difficult to play/impractical/will sound bad. I also made the mistake of misunderstanding how the C-extension on the double bass works, so some fast sequences in the bass that go into that range are unplayable, if that's what you mean.

What do you mean the violin can't play multiple notes simultaneously? A violin can play a four note chord with the low two notes arpeggiated and the higher two sustained as a double stop. I rigorously went through all the multiple stops to make sure they were playable (though some are indeed difficult and will probably need to be played divisi in practice). Have you found any specific mistakes?

Thanks,
-Steven


----------



## hreichgott

I was working on this Schumann today and noticed an adjustment that was probably made for the purposes of staying within the melodic-sounding range of a piano. Thought I'd share, to show an example of how the greats handled this sort of problem.
The piece is Aufschwung (Soaring) from the Fantasiestucke Op. 12. video here

The A theme is stormy, in minor, punctuated, and has a lot of leaps. The B theme is more free, in major, almost like a waltz.
The B theme's melody starts in the higher voice of the right hand, then moves to the upper voice of the left hand, then finally to the lower voice of the left hand. The first time, it's in D flat major and here is how it switches hands:







Left hand moves seamlessly from accompaniment to melody in the same octave. No fuss no muss.

But later it is in A flat major:







Left hand randomly jumps up an octave when it's time for the melody! Why? Only reason I can think of is that melody down in that register would sound unpleasant. That's a compositional decision made 100% due to the nature of the piano. Does it sound bad? Not at all. And definitely sounds much better than it would have in the lower octave.

And there you have it, coming from a master composer, who was married to a concert pianist!


----------



## StevenOBrien

hreichgott said:


> I was working on this Schumann today and noticed an adjustment that was probably made for the purposes of staying within the melodic-sounding range of a piano. Thought I'd share, to show an example of how the greats handled this sort of problem.
> The piece is Aufschwung (Soaring) from the Fantasiestucke Op. 12. video here
> 
> The A theme is stormy, in minor, punctuated, and has a lot of leaps. The B theme is more free, in major, almost like a waltz.
> The B theme's melody starts in the higher voice of the right hand, then moves to the upper voice of the left hand, then finally to the lower voice of the left hand. The first time, it's in D flat major and here is how it switches hands:
> View attachment 13903
> 
> Left hand moves seamlessly from accompaniment to melody in the same octave. No fuss no muss.
> 
> But later it is in A flat major:
> View attachment 13904
> 
> Left hand randomly jumps up an octave when it's time for the melody! Why? Only reason I can think of is that melody down in that register would sound unpleasant. That's a compositional decision made 100% due to the nature of the piano. Does it sound bad? Not at all. And definitely sounds much better than it would have in the lower octave.
> 
> And there you have it, coming from a master composer, who was married to a concert pianist!


Hmm. I guess it's a situation where, as a composer, you have to forget what you heard working previously and settle for something a little worse in one area for the sake of practicality in another. I guess in most cases, I don't personally hear music in terms of the timbre of the instruments it's being played on, I only hear the music itself. It's probably something I need to work on.

I actually recently discovered a situation where Mozart had to change things around. I don't know how many of you know this, but his Clarinet Concerto was originally being written for a Basset Horn in G major, but he abandoned the Basset Horn version during the first movement and went back to rewrite the entire concerto (with very few changes) in A major, once it was decided by his clarinetist, Stadler, that it would work better on a Basset Clarinet.

Here's a section from the G major sketch: 



And here's the same section from the finished A major from the finished concerto: 




I guess he felt he had to rearrange the structure of the melody to work better with the range of the violins. Ever since I heard that sketch though, the A major version has always sounded wrong to me, because the G major version to me makes so much more sense in terms of the shape of the melody.


----------



## Entropically

Hi,

I'm new to this forum!

Steven, I think this is a pretty sweet work. No matter how advanced one's skills are, there will always be room for improvement. So I find the attitude of some people at r/composer, and that harsh post in particular, to be pretty discomforting.

Firstly, that poster's long list of "errors" is actually quite tiny compared to the length of the work. His points all seemed to be concerned with the notation (meh), the practicality of performance (fine), or poorly explained dissatisfaction. The whole post was wrapped in hostility and an assumption that his view on your work was absolute. In short, I hope that you pretty much ignore it when deciding how to continue.

I admire your work and your fight to write after the great masters, despite pressure to conform to modern standards. I think great forms (large and small-scale) allow the listener (and composer) a structural way to view the distinctive qualities of a work. When used together, they form a highway system that we can use to really penetrate the work and see the details more clearly. It's pretty hard to construct a good skeleton for the details of a work to hang on without the use of these known and established forms (even Beethoven trekked slowly towards his freest use of conventional forms).

I've checked out your other works on soundcloud and have listened to this string symphony a few times. I think its your best stuff yet! I really think it's rich and has much to offer on repeat listens. Your use of hyperactive voices reminds me of some romantic or Dvorak symphonies, but even more intense! While it may be hard to get performers to hit all the notes, I think its a really endearing characteristic of your style (hope this isn't influence in the wrong direction!).

I hope you write more soon. I'm excited to hear what you conjure up next!


----------



## StevenOBrien

Entropically said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm new to this forum!
> 
> Steven, I think this is a pretty sweet work. No matter how advanced one's skills are, there will always be room for improvement. So I find the attitude of some people at r/composer, and that harsh post in particular, to be pretty discomforting.
> 
> Firstly, that poster's long list of "errors" is actually quite tiny compared to the length of the work. His points all seemed to be concerned with the notation (meh), the practicality of performance (fine), or poorly explained dissatisfaction. The whole post was wrapped in hostility and an assumption that his view on your work was absolute. In short, I hope that you pretty much ignore it when deciding how to continue.
> 
> I admire your work and your fight to write after the great masters, despite pressure to conform to modern standards. I think great forms (large and small-scale) allow the listener (and composer) a structural way to view the distinctive qualities of a work. When used together, they form a highway system that we can use to really penetrate the work and see the details more clearly. It's pretty hard to construct a good skeleton for the details of a work to hang on without the use of these known and established forms (even Beethoven trekked slowly towards his freest use of conventional forms).
> 
> I've checked out your other works on soundcloud and have listened to this string symphony a few times. I think its your best stuff yet! I really think it's rich and has much to offer on repeat listens. Your use of hyperactive voices reminds me of some romantic or Dvorak symphonies, but even more intense! While it may be hard to get performers to hit all the notes, I think its a really endearing characteristic of your style (hope this isn't influence in the wrong direction!).
> 
> I hope you write more soon. I'm excited to hear what you conjure up next!


Thank you for your kind words, and welcome to TalkClassical!



> (hope this isn't influence in the wrong direction!)


I was actually just researching the possibility of writing string symphonies with added Soprano violin/Violin piccolo sections and an Octobass, which, while fixing the range issues, would probably lead to them never being performed


----------



## mmsbls

StevenOBrien said:


> Apart from the general stuff, there's three things in particular that I'm looking for feedback on. I'm aware that I have a tendency to write in quite a high register for the first violins, and that I write quite a few difficult multiple stops (If possible, I would intend for them all to be played as such, but I wouldn't have an issue with an orchestra choosing to play the more difficult ones as divisi. Every single one is possible to play, because I wanted this work to be playable by a string quintet too). I'm also wondering whether or not my excessive utilization of the double bass' C extension is acceptable. If any of you have any guidance or feedback to offer in these three areas in particular, I'd be very appreciative!


I listened to the piece twice and overall quite enjoyed it. I particularly liked the first and third movements, and I thought the second was lovely. I did enjoy parts of the fourth movement, but for reasons I probably can't articulate well, that movement didn't affect me as strongly as the others. I have no expertise in music so my comments cannot be more explicit.

I did have my wife (violinist) and daughter (cellist) listen to some of the work. Specifically I asked them to comment on some of the issues you and that particularly unpleasant "reviewer" brought up.

Both of them felt that the multiple stops should be modified (or played divisi), and my wife thought the section in measure 122 should be modified as well. It's not that they can't be played, but rather if a string section tried to play them, they would not sound in tune due to the difficulty.

My daughter said the use of the double bass' C extension should not be a problem. The only issue is that extensions are expensive so not all bass players would have them. She also suggested using a piccolo for the high parts before remembering that it was for string orchestra.

Both were rather disgusted with that particular reviewer. Aside from being remarkably rude and arrogant, they felt most of the suggestions were not helpful and some were just incorrect. For example, both said composers do write bowings in scores and neither had an issue with the tempo markings.

During my second pass through the work, my daughter listened as well. She did have issues with certain places feeling they were not constructed well, but much more often she commented on parts she really liked. For example she especially liked several of your modulations and choice of harmony. When it was finished, she said she would have various melodies playing in her head for awhile. Unfortunately, her comments were in real time with the music, and I wouldn't be able to be specific about the nature or place.

May I ask what training you have had in composition either through personal study or with teachers?


----------



## StevenOBrien

mmsbls said:


> I listened to the piece twice and overall quite enjoyed it. I particularly liked the first and third movements, and I thought the second was lovely. I did enjoy parts of the fourth movement, but for reasons I probably can't articulate well, that movement didn't affect me as strongly as the others. I have no expertise in music so my comments cannot be more explicit.
> 
> I did have my wife (violinist) and daughter (cellist) listen to some of the work. Specifically I asked them to comment on some of the issues you and that particularly unpleasant "reviewer" brought up.
> 
> Both of them felt that the multiple stops should be modified (or played divisi), and my wife thought the section in measure 122 should be modified as well. It's not that they can't be played, but rather if a string section tried to play them, they would not sound in tune due to the difficulty.
> 
> My daughter said the use of the double bass' C extension should not be a problem. The only issue is that extensions are expensive so not all bass players would have them. She also suggested using a piccolo for the high parts before remembering that it was for string orchestra.
> 
> Both were rather disgusted with that particular reviewer. Aside from being remarkably rude and arrogant, they felt most of the suggestions were not helpful and some were just incorrect. For example, both said composers do write bowings in scores and neither had an issue with the tempo markings.
> 
> During my second pass through the work, my daughter listened as well. She did have issues with certain places feeling they were not constructed well, but much more often she commented on parts she really liked. For example she especially liked several of your modulations and choice of harmony. When it was finished, she said she would have various melodies playing in her head for awhile. Unfortunately, her comments were in real time with the music, and I wouldn't be able to be specific about the nature or place.
> 
> May I ask what training you have had in composition either through personal study or with teachers?


Thank you for taking the time to listen/get feedback, and please extend my thanks to your wife and daughter! Would it be possible to be more specific about the construction issues your daughter mentioned? Was this in relation to the harmony, the orchestration, the form etc.? Were the issues more prominent in any particular movement/section?

With regards to training, I've never had any formal instruction in music, nor have I ever had anyone I think I could consider a full time teacher, just a lot of friendly people on forums like Talkclassical who were willing to listen and give feedback (thanks guys ). I wrote my first music when I was 15 or so and I've been gradually trying to teach myself ever since. I decided to commit fully to composition in 2011 just before I graduated from high school, and I've been doing odd musical jobs to support myself and trying to hone my skills ever since then. I've compiled a list of all the educational resources I was able to find/use over the past two or three years. For the time being, I have no plans to attend anything like a university or a conservatory, but I'd certainly be interested in working one on one with an experienced composer, just to throw ideas around with them.


----------



## hreichgott

StevenOBrien said:


> I'd certainly be interested in working one on one with an experienced composer, just to throw ideas around with them.


That sounds like a fabulous idea if you can find someone you click with for private lessons. Probably many composers would be happy to take on a pupil.

Maybe for a future piece you could try choosing instrumentation based on extremes of range and tempo? Maybe piano duo, or string orchestra plus pipe organ, or wind ensemble, or some creative chamber-music combination (chimes, timpani, cello, piccolo, horn and bass clarinet??)


----------



## mmsbls

StevenOBrien said:


> Would it be possible to be more specific about the construction issues your daughter mentioned? Was this in relation to the harmony, the orchestration, the form etc.? Were the issues more prominent in any particular movement/section?


I'd have to have my daughter listen to the work again with me stopping the playback and writing down comments. We can do that, but we'll have to find time when she's home again (fairly often). Just to be clear, she is a music student probably close to your age. She has had several years of music theory and scoring so she can recognize issues fairly well, but she's not a composition major.



StevenOBrien said:


> With regards to training, I've never had any formal instruction in music, nor have I ever had anyone I think I could consider a full time teacher, ... I have no plans to attend anything like a university or a conservatory, but I'd certainly be interested in working one on one with an experienced composer, just to throw ideas around with them.


I know cost, time, and potential other issues all play a role with attending a music school, but the combination of composition courses (theory, scoring, etc.) and regular lessons with a composition professor would seem to me invaluable. I see how much my daughter has learned about analyzing music in the few years she's been there, and she's a performance major. Obviously, that's a decision you have to make.


----------



## Ramako

StevenOBrien said:


> For the time being, I have no plans to attend anything like a university or a conservatory, *but I'd certainly be interested in working one on one with an experienced composer*, just to throw ideas around with them.


I hate to be negative but, unless you have already experienced this, I will warn you to be careful about being too hopeful about something like that - because I used to be before I came to university. The standard response I would expect from a professional academic composer would be something like that review you linked earlier, except less detailed, though more subtle and polite, since as a professional they would have a higher consideration of the worth of their time and wouldn't put the time in for feedback.

My main tutor is fortunately quite tolerant, and (for a modern academic composer) has something of a 'weakness' for older styles... But still that does not stop him from being extremely condemnatory of things he sees as 'conventional'. We had a visiting composer last term... I probably will not work with many professional composers from now on unless I have reason to think things will be different.

I am a bit disillusioned, but perhaps you will find someone better to work with. I believe in the principle of academic learning, but I am beginning to think that there is more to learn in analysis, and in 'pastiche' composition, than contemporary composition these days.


----------



## StevenOBrien

hreichgott said:


> That sounds like a fabulous idea if you can find someone you click with for private lessons. Probably many composers would be happy to take on a pupil.
> 
> Maybe for a future piece you could try choosing instrumentation based on extremes of range and tempo? Maybe piano duo, or string orchestra plus pipe organ, or wind ensemble, or some creative chamber-music combination (chimes, timpani, cello, piccolo, horn and bass clarinet??)


I wrote for string orchestra mainly because I wanted to advance my knowledge of string writing, and write the music in a fairly homogeneous sounding setting. The pipe organ thing sounds interesting though, I'll certainly have to consider it.



mmsbls said:


> I'd have to have my daughter listen to the work again with me stopping the playback and writing down comments. We can do that, but we'll have to find time when she's home again (fairly often). Just to be clear, she is a music student probably close to your age. She has had several years of music theory and scoring so she can recognize issues fairly well, but she's not a composition major.
> 
> I know cost, time, and potential other issues all play a role with attending a music school, but the combination of composition courses (theory, scoring, etc.) and regular lessons with a composition professor would seem to me invaluable. I see how much my daughter has learned about analyzing music in the few years she's been there, and she's a performance major. Obviously, that's a decision you have to make.


Your daughter's detailed comments were very helpful, I can't thank the two of you enough!

Money is one issue, indeed, but it's also a curtailment of freedom. I'm worried that with things like specific compositional assignments, I'm going to suddenly begin to really despise composing because I can no longer do what I want.

I personally find organized education very difficult to deal with. I nearly dropped out of high school because I was finding it difficult to cope with. I really don't want to go through another 4 to 6 years of it. There are many resources available online for studying the materials you would learn in college, including college standard textbooks and even freely available lectures! I can't say for certain how much I'm missing out on from not going to college, but I don't think it's an awful lot. If someone can say something to the contrary, I'd be very interested to hear it.

The only thing that seems to be missing from the equation is working one on one with a well established composer. If I go to a college, I'll probably end up being stuck with one without much choice into who it is, and what if it's a person that despises my style as being archaic?! Even if I don't currently have someone to work one on one with, I have a consensus of people across different forums to give me feedback, which to me is unique and invaluable.

I've also noticed that virtually all of the people who seem to angrily denounce my music as being "18th century cosplay" are generally composition graduate students, so it makes me wonder... 

If anyone else has something to say about this, again, I'd love to hear it.



Ramako said:


> I hate to be negative but, unless you have already experienced this, I will warn you to be careful about being too hopeful about something like that - because I used to be before I came to university. The standard response I would expect from a professional academic composer would be something like that review you linked earlier, except less detailed, though more subtle and polite, since as a professional they would have a higher consideration of the worth of their time and wouldn't put the time in for feedback.
> 
> My main tutor is fortunately quite tolerant, and (for a modern academic composer) has something of a 'weakness' for older styles... But still that does not stop him from being extremely condemnatory of things he sees as 'conventional'. We had a visiting composer last term... I probably will not work with many professional composers from now on unless I have reason to think things will be different.
> 
> I am a bit disillusioned, but perhaps you will find someone better to work with. I believe in the principle of academic learning, but I am beginning to think that there is more to learn in analysis, and in 'pastiche' composition, than contemporary composition these days.


Thanks for sharing your experience. This is exactly what I fear .


----------



## Billy

Thanks Steven for sharing your enjoyable piece. I find in it much hope and inspiration. Best wishes, Billy


----------



## Zabirilog

Great, I say. Please make a symphony also for the full orchestra!


----------



## StevenOBrien

Zabirilog said:


> Great, I say. Please make a symphony also for the full orchestra!


Thanks . I plan to, once I have a little more experience. You might be interested in some of my more minor orchestral works though:

__
https://soundcloud.com/stevenobrien%2Fsets


----------



## Kieran

Steven, I spent some time recently listening to your music on soundcloud, especially the piano music performed by Heather Reichgott, and it played right into my ear. This is the kind of music I love, sharp melodies, expressive of mood but capable of flow. 

Thanks for sharing it!


----------



## hreichgott

Thanks Kieran! Steven's fan club grows


----------



## Kieran

hreichgott said:


> Thanks Kieran! Steven's fan club grows


Ah! No doubt "Heather!" His fan club does indeed grow. You play quite marvelously, by the way...


----------



## BaronAlstromer

I liked this one.


----------

