Adagio

[Boneman]

Still working on this one! Looking for any comments(aren't we all!) about the shape, form etc rather than the notes

http://soundclick.com/share?songid=6244191

[stevel]

Originally Posted by Boneman

Still working on this one! Looking for any comments(aren't we all!) about the shape, form etc rather than the notes

http://soundclick.com/share?songid=6244191

IMHO:

At about 1:24 I'm ready for a change of texture. The added motion in the parts is nice, and the pacing overall is nice, but...

At 1:57 I get the texture change I was hearing earlier. Could this happen sooner?

Around 2:39 you have a strange and unexpected drop-out to just the low stuff - seems to "lose the vibe" of the piece so-to-speak.

In general, you have a "wandering" sort of idea - it's OK, but can get tiresome and obscure other ideas. Luckily, around 3:05 you introduce a "chordal idea" that provides a new POINT OF INTEREST. And that's what I'm going to say the music lacks up to now (in general, there are certainly areas of interest here and there).

The melody around 3:22 provides a new POI - good! What happens now is, things without a POI tend to sound either introductory, or developmental, or simply accompanimental. Your opening sounds like it's introductory material, and that's why it feels like it goes on "building" too long. It needs a POI sooner.

Around 3:30, you add more motion, another POI - good, but if you continued doing this, you'd run the risk of it becoming developmental - luckily,

Around 3:50 you introduce a completely new idea. Now. I think it's bad here - it's out of place. It's like you've had this very "wandery" and "undulating" type of accompanimental texture, and suddenly you have these pizz notes in a very melodically directed presentation.

I think what would help is to introduce the pizz earlier - so we're already hearing it - then you can drop things out to "reveal" the pizz stuff and then bring things back in as you did. It makes a nice TRANSITION - which is also something you don't always necessarily have (and it's one of the single hardest things for most composers - even the famous ones - to do even remotely well). This is one of the things that contributes to the "patchworkiness" that others and I have commented on (and true of many people's work, present company included). This example is not so patchworky Kevin, but something like what happens at 2:39 or 3:50 do tend do sound like they're not logically related to the rest of the sections.

At 4:12 you have another good POI and I like the way it builds to the end. The end is a little anticlimactic though. With these kinds of "undulating" or "constant motion" type patterns, you usually expect them to "wind down", or build to a frenzy or something (not that you have to do that, but my point is, I would think about how you want this to end).

You have a nice moment with some muted trumpets in there. I have to ask though, why? What do they do? Why are they there? Are they cool? If so, why don't we hear them again - or earlier? It's like the cool chords at around 3:05, or the pizz section beginning around 3:50 - they're cool - why not use them again. I feel like you're afraid to repeat material, or that you feel that there has to be this constant need for variation, or "building up of patterns" etc. I feel like you have these great ideas, but you kind of just present them, and then, you're on to something else. You never give an idea a chance to grow into anything more substantial (now, you certainly have ideas that evolve, and even morph, but it seems like you're interested in planting, watering, and cutting your rose to get it into the vase, but you don't really stop and smell while it's growing - does that make sense?).

HTH,
Steve

[Boneman]

I know this is a long time to reply but I have been very busy! Thanks for the comments Steve I shall be looking thorough them with a view to implimenting some of them in a revision. The piece is due for performance in June.

Are there any other comments to help me?

[VicDiesel]

You start out with some fairly simple melodic material. I think it repeats more than it warrants. (In particular the passage from 0:35-0:50 is fairly aimless, you can't do that so short after you've barely introduced a theme.) Good thing that at 1:24 you introduce some new thoughts.

I like the sudden transition at 2:38. Makes the listener sit up and wonder "what's he doing now?".

The beginning of the piece is based on some clear melodic material, and so is the end. What's the relation between the one and the other?

Victor.