• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

I'm writing a symphony

I am now about 8 minutes into the first movement:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10012914/sym3-1.mp3

Still a lot of polishing to do. I have added an introduction, the development section, and the beginning of the recapitulation. The introduction sets the stage for the overall nature of the work; which is all about mashing-up the styles and techniques from the Baroque and Classical/Romantic eras. It starts with a stereotypically classical sustained unison with a drum roll, but quickly morphs into a French overture style typical of the 18th century.

The recap is currently a cut-and-paste of the exposition (with a couple of slight variations), but I'm going to vary it some more. It cuts off at the moment where, the first time around, the key goes from A minor to E minor. Following convention (and the whole point of Ardent Formulism is to gleefully follow convention!), the second theme will follow, but in A minor instead of E minor.
 
Wow...that makes me want to put on a powdered wig and a puffy sleeved shirt. Really nice job. It does sound sort of Mozartsy. I kept imagining a gilded ballroom filled with dandies and big wigged women dancing in circles.

Although it needs a guitar solo in there somewhere. :)
 
Macgyver1968 said:
Wow...that makes me want to put on a powdered wig and a puffy sleeved shirt. Really nice job. It does sound sort of Mozartsy. I kept imagining a gilded ballroom filled with dandies and big wigged women dancing in circles.

Although it needs a guitar solo in there somewhere. :)
Click to expand...

Done!
 
I've started work on the slow movement, which was originally going to be the second movement, but which I think I will now move to the third position, just before the finale.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10012914/sym3-2.mp3

It is a passacaglia, with the added twist that the repeated bass line uses classical rather than Baroque phrasology. Specifically, it is twice as long and features a change of key center halfway through, giving it a binary structure.
 
aggle-rithm said:
I am now about 8 minutes into the first movement:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10012914/sym3-1.mp3

Still a lot of polishing to do. I have added an introduction, the development section, and the beginning of the recapitulation. The introduction sets the stage for the overall nature of the work; which is all about mashing-up the styles and techniques from the Baroque and Classical/Romantic eras. It starts with a stereotypically classical sustained unison with a drum roll, but quickly morphs into a French overture style typical of the 18th century.

The recap is currently a cut-and-paste of the exposition (with a couple of slight variations), but I'm going to vary it some more. It cuts off at the moment where, the first time around, the key goes from A minor to E minor. Following convention (and the whole point of Ardent Formulism is to gleefully follow convention!), the second theme will follow, but in A minor instead of E minor.
Click to expand...

How do you see your composition methodology affecting the score, as compared to, say, the methods that Mozart used or might have used? Most of what I know about Mozart's methods I learned from Amadeus, I'll admit, but I've listened to his music quite a lot.

I note that there seem to be no definitely stated themes like the romantics liked, but it seems numerous phrases with variations that the classicists used.

My ear is only half formed, and I cannot play an instrument, let alone compose. I admire your capability.

EDT: I just stumbled across this thread today; now I'm going to have to take the time to start from the beginning and listen to the whole development (I had only listened to your first movement). Thanks for posting; this will be really interesting.
 
Last edited:
Great job! Sounds terrific -- I love Baroque sounding pieces, and this is very upbeat!
 
shadron said:
How do you see your composition methodology affecting the score, as compared to, say, the methods that Mozart used or might have used? Most of what I know about Mozart's methods I learned from Amadeus, I'll admit, but I've listened to his music quite a lot.
Click to expand...

I use modern technology as a crutch quite a bit more than I used to (and, of course, Mozart did). Mozart did a lot of composing in his head, but he had the aural feedback of the piano to test out ideas (there is a story where he was having his hair styled for a concert, and he kept jumping up and running to the keyboard to try out some new idea).

Today, I can play the music back as I enter it into the computer. It accelerates the process, but at the cost of some of the skill I used to have in formulating the whole thing in my mind...this is where the really good ideas come from. Sometimes I have to take a break from the computer and just mull it over.

In a big work like this, it helps to make a CD and listen to it in the car. If something sounds awkward I can spot it then and go back to correct it.

Mozart sometimes reworked his scores after the first performance, which was the first opportunity for him to really hear what it sounded like. The changes were usually in the instrumentation, not the actual notes.
 
aggle-rithm said:
I've started work on the slow movement, which was originally going to be the second movement, but which I think I will now move to the third position, just before the finale.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10012914/sym3-2.mp3

It is a passacaglia, with the added twist that the repeated bass line uses classical rather than Baroque phrasology. Specifically, it is twice as long and features a change of key center halfway through, giving it a binary structure.
Click to expand...

I've mostly completed the passacaglia, and have now started on the fourth movement, a ricercar:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10012914/sym3-4.mp3

This will be by far the most ambitious part of the symphony. It will attempt to fuse a quadruple fugue with a rondo-sonata form. I'm not sure how successful it will be, but I'm just going to have to dive in and find out.
 
aggle-rithm said:
I use modern technology as a crutch quite a bit more than I used to (and, of course, Mozart did). Mozart did a lot of composing in his head, but he had the aural feedback of the piano to test out ideas (there is a story where he was having his hair styled for a concert, and he kept jumping up and running to the keyboard to try out some new idea).

Today, I can play the music back as I enter it into the computer. It accelerates the process, but at the cost of some of the skill I used to have in formulating the whole thing in my mind...this is where the really good ideas come from. Sometimes I have to take a break from the computer and just mull it over.

In a big work like this, it helps to make a CD and listen to it in the car. If something sounds awkward I can spot it then and go back to correct it. Mozart sometimes reworked his scores after the first performance, which was the first opportunity for him to really hear what it sounded like. The changes were usually in the instrumentation, not the actual notes.
Click to expand...

Hadn't checked in in a while, and I found this really interesting. I know what you mean. When one is working on the particulars of a section, it's very easy to get accustomed to something, and to lose perspective. That is, one loses perspective on questionable note-choices (the details) and also the big picture (pacing, flow, overall form). So, relaxing and listening in some other place (like the car, where there's lots of noise) can be a very good way to get another perspective. Also, sleeping on it, or going for a jog are two good ways of getting another perspective.

It can be a bad idea to struggle endlessly with a small section: Your ears get so fatigued, and you get such a false perspective from hearing it over and over -- which your audience presumably won't -- that it can be a waste of time.

I'm not saying you're like that: In fact, what struck me on listening to the first movement I heard was how well-proportioned it was, and how well it built over time. It had conviction.

I'll do some listening later. Trying to save my ears for my own composing, today.

The sequencer is an amazing tool for relaxed "listening out of the corner of your ear". (Rather than playing it over and over on the piano.)
 
Thanks for the feedback...

calebprime said:
The sequencer is an amazing tool for relaxed "listening out of the corner of your ear". (Rather than playing it over and over on the piano.)
Click to expand...

Yes...it's such a good tool that sometimes it feels like I'm "cheating". But, it's available, so why not use it?
 
calebprime said:
I'm not saying you're like that: In fact, what struck me on listening to the first movement I heard was how well-proportioned it was, and how well it built over time. It had conviction.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I can't take credit for this, as I slavishly followed the sonata-allegro formula (which is kind of the point of ardent formulism)...but thanks anyway!
 
Listened to what is now called mvt. 3. I've heard part of this before.

Some first and second impressions this time around-- because both are important to the process of listening and judging.

First impressions: You're a mo-fo. A reharmonizing fiend. Damn, you're good. You're not just ardent, you're a fanatic. Awesome how you'll sometimes resolve a suspension on the next chord which is different -- so you get the effect of the resolution, but the chord-change keeps the momentum going. Your progressions are not like anyone else's and they're complex. But they're never unmusical. That goes for the rest of your style, also.

Thought I heard one clinker -- just a plain ol' wrong note, roughly 2/3 to 3/4 of the way through. But I couldn't find it when I went back, and I can't give an exact timing. When I went back, thought I heard another, but it was only in some little grace-note or something. Will listen again.

My problem in composition and life is throwing in the towel too soon -- some of my pieces just lay down and die. You're not that way -- you're an energizer bunny. I personally, would avoid SSRI's because they'd make me manic and I wouldn't know who I was, and I'd fear "discontinuance" syndrome. No neurological free lunches. Everything has its price. In other words, I'm so accustomed to being discouraged that I wouldn't recognize myself any other way.

Ahem. Getting back to the piece. There's an intro and then the main section? I'd like to hear a transition or breathing-space inserted, or the beginning of the main section articulated more clearly. And for the main section, same thing: I'd like one or two "no-information, no-work holidays" added between some important junctures to make them clearer, to make more contrast, to make them more of an event.

You've already done most almost all of the hard work. Let the piece take a day off, here and there. It would be psychologically hard for you, but compositionally trivial. One or two instruments, a pedal-tone. Or some timpani, just tapping away. Not much happening, for a change. Ardency made more ardent with a breather, a break between intense bouts of amour, or labour, whichever term you prefer.

More listening, less talking, later. I want to post about microtones in my own thread, for Quarky and Blobru and the one sad graduate student with a tic and no future who happened to stumble on my page.
 
Last edited:
Another listen to first mvt. No clinker this time, but same reaction:

It's as if Dustin Pedroia, one of my favorite Red Sox players, came up to bat, and hit a home run.

Then, he runs around the bases as fast as he can.

Then, instead of going into the dug-out, he runs out of the stadium, and runs into the parking lot behind the Green Monster, and retrieves the ball.

Then, he runs back into the stadium, and insists that the pitcher pitch to him, all over again, while everyone looks on in befuddlement.

Somehow, he talks the pitcher into pitching again, and Damn! he hits another home run, etc.


To bring it back to music. (I firmly believe) you need to let the impact of some your beautiful thoughts sink in, before immediately going into the next thing. I mean, add a bar or two, sometimes -- or a section, where needed -- of repose, before the next thing happens. Just some breathing-room, or processing-time, for the audience. Maybe not entirely trivial, but, I think, what's needed isn't more content. It's more no-content.

Honestly, I wouldn't presume to give this advice unless I thought you were really good, but were sort of trying too hard, or too continuously.
 
Last edited:
Second Movement

Frickin' brilliant. Perfect. It manages to have your kind of continuous energy with plenty of contrast.

I don't recall if the galumphing bassoons on 1 and 4 were there before. I think not. They are great -- almost like Beethoven humor.
 
Third Mvt.

D | F C#|D A|Bb D|Ab D|C F|B c-d|E E|A

or something, in pig-notation.

And, speaking of pigs, this is one unlovely, ungainly toon.

With the diminished fourth between the f and c#, the tritones between the ab and d, and f and b. You're doing it on purpose. No doubt about that.

You don't put lipstick on it, but it becomes prettier when it's dressed up in some harmonic clothing.

Then it kind of parades around. When the eighths (or sixteenths) change to triplets, that's very effective.

Reminds me a little of the obsessive repetition in slow movement of Beethoven's Seventh. But the character is different. Not tragic, but sort of proud of its fate, putting a good face on the fact that it's the Ugliest Man in Town.

I think you should introduce the rhythmic variation earlier, or just abruptly go into different material. But that's my first listening, and I don't have absolute pitch, nor perfect judgment. I think that the funky pitches in the theme will allow you to go to some remote keys abruptly, because you've already set that up.

eta: I think I see why the Bb doesn't resolve to A right away -- you're saving A for the very end of the phrase. The Ab left hanging is nice and ugly.

eta: the major-second downward-resolving suspensions recall the first mvt.
 
Last edited:
scnd listen to 3rd mvt.

I was too fixated on the naked open, and too fixated on my first impression of the string-sound, which is just sound-font.

The harmonies that follow are stately and beautiful.

I have to remember that you're not trying to be an electronic composer.

When the horns take the theme, that Ab/G# still jars, a little, the first time, and other times. 3 times.

Maybe your music already shows that harmonic support is enough to soften the harshness or "ugliness" of the theme.

Probably you're thinking of it as a G#, not an Ab -- part of an augmented 6th with the Bb, pincering-in* on the dominant.

Humans will play those repeated notes much better than computer/synths.

The flute arpeggios are very nice.

The more harmonic filling-in, the less the "harsh" angularity effect.

I apologize for overstating my first impression. First impressions are important, but not always right. Also, I'm reliably in a better mood in the morning, before the day has gone down in defeat, and so music sounds better to me in the morning.

I'm not sure that I like the octave-doubling of the theme -- high and low strings.

The clarinet break thingy should be longer. Maybe two to three times longer.
 
Last edited:
calebprime said:
I'm not sure that I like the octave-doubling of the theme -- high and low strings.
Click to expand...

You may be right. I'm on the fence about that part.

The clarinet break thingy should be longer. Maybe two to three times longer.
Click to expand...

It's meant to sound like a mini-candenza often found near the end of Baroque organ pieces. They're mostly about this long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom