Music Composers Unite!
It´s been a long time since I last posted anything here. Well, here is my latest work. It is way shorter than my first symphony (17 minutes against 52), especially because it only consists of one movement. After much thinking (I completed it in May), I accepted that I had nothing else to say, so one movement was enough.
Orchestra: strings (violins I, violins II, violas, cellos, double basses), 2 trombones, 2 Wagner tubas in B-flat, french horn, clarinet in B-flat, soprano solo, celesta, timpani.
Recorded with Sibelius | Ultimate, Noteperformer3.
As always, I thank everybody in advance for all their thoughts, commentaries, suggestions, etc, etc.
Enjoy your weekend
A nice accomplishment.
If you wish it to be called a symphony then symphony it is although it largely came across as an impressionist piece to me about wide open spaces.
Just my views. It didn't seem to vary harmonically much nor tempo wise until about 9'50" when you lent it more energy but the pulse at 10'45" seemed unvarying in its harmony. At 12'15" it came alive with a burst of energy which I was expecting to continue to the end but at 12'54" it ramped down again and reverted to a recap of the opening mood. In a way, the energetic part was too short to balance in the work as a whole. Is it worth considering extending that section?
The scoring worked fine, well balanced, not too elaborate which is fine in context.
Congrats, then, a pleasant piece to listen to.
Impressive work, Valerio.
Listening at it again after leaving comment on YT.
I can hear echoes of the finest Italian orchestral tradition here.
My only complaint — a matter of personal taste indeed — is for some of the ostinato passages. I can see how hard is not make them sounding “cinematic” in these days of ubiquitous pre-baked galloping low strings one-note patterns. There must be a way out from all this…
An highly enjoyable, inspired (and inspiring) piece of music anyway.
Thank you all for the comments!
In chronological order:
Dane: Sorry for the late reply, I´m happy to read that you liked it. I thought it would work as a symphony - or its nutshell, at least - as it's structured (loosely) on sonata form. Hence the idea that it would stand as a symphony's first movement - not implying that sonata form has been needed in symphonies anymore in about 120 years. Regarding the choked climax, I see your point, and thank you for underlying it. On second thought, it does sound a bit unbalanced.
Fabio: I am glad to hear you appreciate and find this piece inspiring. Indeed I do understand what you mean by cinematic. I try to make the most out of the "high" models I bathe in (in this case Bruckner, Mahler, Shostakovich and Yoshimatsu), but apparently I guess it's easier than one thoughts to end up exploiting stereotypical tools in composing from our everyday mainstream music exposure, movies included. Thank you again for your commentary.
I would start the symphony from 2:53.
The string passages are too long for my taste, it is like saying a word for a long time, instead of communicating with phrases.
As I'm listening well into the 7th minute I have heard nothing substantial or interesting, composers of old like Beethoven or Mozart would have finished the movement by now. I'm not comparing you to them, but just something to remember. You make it too long without saying much, and repeating the same long passages is not helpful.
By that time, its either the long passages have to be so compelling that it would justify the long time, or if they are not compelling enough, music has to go on, articulating your musical statements in a timely manner.
Yesterday I was composing a piece of music, but I figured that even though there are some passages there that I liked, the piece was too long, so I discarded it completely and begun composing a totally new work. Time is of the essence when it comes to music.
Me too regretting the days when “ostinato” meant Bruckner and Mahler, not cheap Hans Zimmer impersonators.
(Disclaimer: HZ music is often terrific)