• Thanks for listening Bob.  I appreciate it. 

    I had intended to carry the piece a bit further, and am continuing to look at extending it some.  Key change for the last four bars doesn't make a whole lot of sense now that I look at it.  Endings have always been a weak(er?) spot for me.  It sometimes seems like it would be easier to write a 90 minute piece.  Everyone would quit listening before the end, and I wouldn't have to do an ending!

    Thanks again for the input.  I'm working on a minor(ish) section to precede what hopefully will be a better ending.

  • Tim,

         This is a lot of good orchestration and sound, but it needs a unifying theme.  I liked the melody you introduced in the middle of the piece but then you went away from it.  I also liked the brass choir towards the end.  The listener waits in great expectation for the big theme that never comes.

         Good idea to put more than one part on a staff and number them.  It makes more sense than writing a score with 30 staves.


  • Lawrence,

    Thank you for taking time to listen.

    Thematically, the whole piece is based on just 2 themes.  The theme at letter E, and the Tpt. solo at letter J.  The goal was to use rhythmic and other variations to hint at the actual melodies.  It evidently didn't work as well as I hoped.  I do see your point regarding a "big theme", perhaps as I rework the piece I can fix this problem.  Some may be coming from the points Bob brought out where it doesn't quite feel completed.   

    Combining parts on a staff is almost required in concert band scores.  The number of different parts makes this a practical necessity.  Some full symphonic band works (grade 4+) will have a possible 5-6 more voices above what I have here.  Even on tabloid size scores, this creates very small notes on the page.

    Thanks again for your thoughts.

  • Thanks Michael.  I'm glad you liked it.

    I do see the points others have made, and do plan to rework it a bit.  I'll repost it once I finish. 

This reply was deleted.