# Tyranny & Aristocracy



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

The last two depictions of my work - The Five Regimes.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Yes, better in the earlier parts which are less contrapuntal. The chromaticism is more convincing.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Thanks for sharing this work. I do think you possess some natural talent and I like your confidence and boldness of your attitude. You are not afraid to think for yourself, or to put yourself out there even after receiving criticism, that's good, I think.

My impression of the work is that it shows some ability, but in my view it is ability that hasn't been developed to a very high degree yet. I don't hear a unique compositional voice, the over all aesthetic is tried and true so it is not offensive to the ears, nor is it exciting. Therefore I found myself losing interest before the piece had ended. 

Just my 2 cents, hope I'm not coming across as too harsh. A lot of contemporary classical music is simplified and of an older aesthetic, so perhaps this could have some success with audiences in that sense, but held up against music of the masters, you are just not there yet in my view.


----------



## 1996D (Dec 18, 2018)

tdc said:


> Thanks for sharing this work. I do think you possess some natural talent and I like your confidence and boldness of your attitude. You are not afraid to think for yourself, or to put yourself out there even after receiving criticism, that's good, I think.
> 
> My impression of the work is that it shows some ability, but in my view it is ability that hasn't been developed to a very high degree yet. I don't hear a unique compositional voice, the over all aesthetic is tried and true so it is not offensive to the ears, nor is it exciting. Therefore I found myself losing interest before the piece had ended.
> 
> Just my 2 cents, hope I'm not coming across as too harsh. A lot of contemporary classical music is simplified and of an older aesthetic, so perhaps this could have some success with audiences in that sense, but held up against music of the masters, you are just not there yet in my view.


It's fine, this was my first serious piece.

Most composers don't write orchestral works until much later in life - I'm in my early 20s and I feel this is a nice introduction to my form. Give it another go, it gets better with time, and I've yet to get tired of it; proof of its natural and inspired construction.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Disaster, horror, rage, chaos, sorrow, a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel...This music's determination to convey a message is clear. As program music it succeeds in doing that, perhaps to a considerable extent (each listener has to decide how successful it is). As absolute music, though, the piece is amorphous and frustrating, with few defined or memorable ideas and shapes, its wandering polyphonic strands unrewarding when one tries (and often fails) to hear and follow them, its sonority overwrought and clotted, and its style indefinite (though style isn't easily or fairly judged by a single piece). The general impression is rather like a drugged memory of late Mahler. But I'd much rather hear late Mahler.

This piece suggests a composer whose intense desire to say something important is getting in the way of the craft of music-making. A too-great devotion to his message can make an artist feel that his work is better than it is. I suspect that focusing on program music early in your career may not be the wisest course. Sibelius wrote lots of good chamber music before he stunned us with _Kullervo,_ and Mendelssohn was already a veteran composer by the time he opened the doors to fairyland at 17.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

1996D said:


> It's fine, this was my first serious piece.
> 
> *Most composers don't write orchestral works until much later in life *- I'm in my early 20s and I feel this is a nice introduction to my form. Give it another go, it gets better with time, and I've yet to get tired of it; proof of its natural and inspired construction.


Actually, many start out with orchestral works. They are less challenging than chamber music, since lots of sonority and color can superficially seem to compensate for a dearth of melody and cogent progression. Shostakovich First Symphony at 19, Prokofiev First Concerto as graduation piece, Rachmaninoff First Symphony at 21. All of the major Classical composers, not to mention Schubert, Mendelssohn, Schumann, Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky … In fact, I'm not sure who you're thinking of(?)

In what you posted there was no light and air. The texture was uniformly thick and the constant brass and sustained chordal textures became tiresome quickly. As for melodic content - was there any that's memorable? I mean, any sustained linear thought - any extended melodic motion that could stand on its own?

You might want to worry about whether you are bamboozling yourself with bluster. If you really want to know where you stand and what skills you need to develop, try writing something (non-programmatic!) for string quartet. No weakness goes unexposed in that kind of exercise.


----------



## Minor Sixthist (Apr 21, 2017)

EdwardBast said:


> Actually, many start out with orchestral works. They are less challenging than chamber music, since lots of sonority and color can superficially seem to compensate for a dearth of melody and cogent progression. Shostakovich First Symphony at 19, Prokofiev First Concerto as graduation piece, Rachmaninoff First Symphony at 21. All of the major Classical composers, not to mention Schubert, Mendelssohn, Schumann, Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky … In fact, I'm not sure who you're thinking of(?)
> 
> In what you posted there was no light and air. The texture was uniformly thick and *the constant brass and sustained chordal textures became tiresome quickly.* As for melodic content - was there any that's memorable? I mean, any sustained linear thought - any extended melodic motion that could stand on its own?
> 
> You might want to worry about whether you are bamboozling yourself with bluster. If you really want to know where you stand and what skills you need to develop, try writing something (non-programmatic!) for string quartet. No weakness goes unexposed in that kind of exercise.


Tiresome to the listener, _and to the performer._ This better be somewhere later in the piece, because these poor brass players won't have much more face after this. Bless them.

You know what makes _fff_ low brass blasts like these so formidable and awesome in the canon? Not having them carry over three minutes! You need contrast BEFORE the audience settles into it. You need them to be startled and disturbed only to then promptly be thrust somewhere else.

Of course, as I must infer from OP's comments, He is 23-year-old God. As it happens I am not God, so take my heresy with grains of salt.


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

Minor Sixthist said:


> Tiresome to the listener, _and to the performer._ This better be somewhere later in the piece, because these poor brass players won't have much more face after this. Bless them.


You know I thought about that too (being an ex-trumpet player), but I decided I wasn't going to waste my time determining exactly how long 1996D had the low brass playing non-stop because I didn't want to hear it again. But bless you for doing so. You're perfectly right.


----------

